%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : iProver---3.9.4
% Problem : MGT071+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Fri Sep 25 02:13:01 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 1.89s 1.17s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.89s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 42 ( 4 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 43 ( 23 ~; 12 |; 6 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 0 sgn 29 !; 5 ?; 11 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f14,axiom,
! [X0,X1,X2,X3] :
( axis_conflict(X0,X1,X2,X3)
<=> ~ ? [X4] :
( in_closed(X4,X2,X3)
& in_closed(X4,X0,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+2.ax',axis_conflict_def) ).
fof(f40,axiom,
axis_conflict(n0,n5,n10,n15),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conflict_hyp) ).
fof(f41,conjecture,
~ ? [X0] :
( in_closed(X0,n10,n15)
& in_closed(X0,n0,n5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',no_false_conflict) ).
fof(f42,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ? [X0] :
( in_closed(X0,n10,n15)
& in_closed(X0,n0,n5) ),
inference(negated_conjecture,[status(cth)],[f41]) ).
fof(f43,plain,
? [X0] :
( in_closed(X0,n10,n15)
& in_closed(X0,n0,n5) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f42]) ).
fof(f44,plain,
! [X0,X1,X2,X3] :
( axis_conflict(X0,X1,X2,X3)
=> ~ ? [X4] :
( in_closed(X4,X2,X3)
& in_closed(X4,X0,X1) ) ),
inference(unused_predicate_definition_removal,[],[f14]) ).
fof(f56,plain,
! [X0,X1,X2,X3] :
( ~ axis_conflict(X0,X1,X2,X3)
| ! [X4] :
( ~ in_closed(X4,X2,X3)
| ~ in_closed(X4,X0,X1) ) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f44]) ).
fof(f86,plain,
( in_closed(sK0,n10,n15)
& in_closed(sK0,n0,n5) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK0]),skolemize(X0,sK0)],[f43]) ).
fof(f110,plain,
! [X2,X3,X0,X1,X4] :
( ~ axis_conflict(X0,X1,X2,X3)
| ~ in_closed(X4,X2,X3)
| ~ in_closed(X4,X0,X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f56]) ).
fof(f141,plain,
axis_conflict(n0,n5,n10,n15),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f40]) ).
fof(f142,plain,
in_closed(sK0,n10,n15),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f86]) ).
fof(f143,plain,
in_closed(sK0,n0,n5),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f86]) ).
tcf(c_72,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i,X2: $i,X3: $i,X4: $i] :
( ~ in_closed(X4,X2,X3)
| ~ in_closed(X4,X0,X1)
| ~ axis_conflict(X0,X1,X2,X3) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f110]) ).
tcf(c_103,plain,
axis_conflict(n0,n5,n10,n15),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f141]) ).
tcf(c_104,negated_conjecture,
in_closed(sK0,n0,n5),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f143]) ).
tcf(c_105,negated_conjecture,
in_closed(sK0,n10,n15),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f142]) ).
tcf(c_470,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i,X2: $i,X3: $i,X4: $i] :
( ~ in_closed(X4,X2,X3)
| ~ in_closed(X4,X0,X1)
| ( X3 != n15 )
| ( X2 != n10 )
| ( X1 != n5 )
| ( X0 != n0 ) ),
inference(resolution_lifted,[status(thm)],[c_72,c_103]) ).
tcf(c_471,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( ~ in_closed(X0,n10,n15)
| ~ in_closed(X0,n0,n5) ),
inference(unflattening,[status(thm)],[c_470]) ).
tcf(c_740,negated_conjecture,
in_closed(sK0,n10,n15),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_105]) ).
tcf(c_741,negated_conjecture,
in_closed(sK0,n0,n5),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_104]) ).
tcf(c_1104,plain,
~ in_closed(sK0,n10,n15),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_741,c_471]) ).
tcf(c_1105,plain,
$false,
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_1104,c_740]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : MGT071+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % DateTime : Thu Sep 24 01:22:23 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.09/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/iproveropt-multi-core.sh -d -n -l tptp -s fof_schedule -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.09/0.42
% 0.09/0.42 % ======== iProver multi-core TPTP/SMT =========
% 0.09/0.42
% 0.09/0.42 % Detected problem language: tptp
% 0.09/0.43 % Proving...
% 1.89/1.17 % SZS status Started for theBenchmark.p
% 1.89/1.17 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 %---------------- iProver v3.9.4 (pre CASC 2026/SMT-COMP 2026) ----------------%
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ iProver source info
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % git: date: 2026-07-19 20:42:38 +0200
% 1.89/1.17 % git: sha1: 804e7d636a263075307957e923b7a22a4035de61
% 1.89/1.17 % git: non_committed_changes: false
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Parsing...
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Clausification by vclausify_rel & Parsing by iProver...%
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Preprocessing... sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e pe_s pe:1:0s pe:2:0s pe:4:0s pe_e sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 2 0s sf_e pe_s pe_e %
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Preprocessing... gs_s sp: 0 0s gs_e snvd_s sp: 0 0s snvd_e %
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Preprocessing... sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e sf_s rm: 0 0s sf_e
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Proving...
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Problem Properties
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 %
% 1.89/1.17 % clauses 34
% 1.89/1.17 % conjectures 2
% 1.89/1.17 % EPR 28
% 1.89/1.17 % Horn 28
% 1.89/1.17 % unary 15
% 1.89/1.17 % binary 7
% 1.89/1.17 % lits 68
% 1.89/1.17 % lits eq 20
% 1.89/1.17 % fd_pure 0
% 1.89/1.17 % fd_pseudo 0
% 1.89/1.17 % fd_cond 3
% 1.89/1.17 % fd_pseudo_cond 4
% 1.89/1.17 % AC symbols 0
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Schedule dynamic 5 is on
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Input Options "--resolution_flag false --inst_lit_sel_side none" Time Limit: 10.
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------
% 1.89/1.17 % Current options:
% 1.89/1.17 % ------
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 %
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % ------ Proving...
% 1.89/1.17 %
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 1.89/1.17
% 1.89/1.17
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------