%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : MGT080+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.3.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n013.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 : Thu Sep 24 01:28:08 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 0.79s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 166 ( 113 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 36 ( 6 avg)
% Number of connectives : 264 ( 122 ~; 10 |; 130 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 37 ( 8 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 13 ( 13 usr; 13 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 26 ( 2 sgn 10 !; 8 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(odrl365,conjecture,
~ ? [X1,X2,X3,X13] :
( leq(v150,X13)
& in_lopen(X13,v0,v300)
& in_lopen(X3,v0,v32)
& leq(v8,X3)
& in_open(X2,v0,v500)
& less(v100,X2)
& in_closed(X1,v800,v800)
& in_closed(X1,v600,v600) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',odrl365) ).
fof(in_closed,axiom,
! [X1,X4,X5] :
( in_closed(X1,X4,X5)
<=> ( leq(X1,X5)
& leq(X4,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+2.ax',in_closed) ).
fof(leq_antisym,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( leq(X2,X1)
& leq(X1,X2) )
=> X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+0.ax',leq_antisym) ).
fof(distinct,axiom,
( v600 != v800
& v500 != v800
& v500 != v600
& v300 != v800
& v300 != v600
& v300 != v500
& v150 != v800
& v150 != v600
& v150 != v500
& v150 != v300
& v100 != v800
& v100 != v600
& v100 != v500
& v100 != v300
& v100 != v150
& v32 != v800
& v32 != v600
& v32 != v500
& v32 != v300
& v32 != v150
& v32 != v100
& v8 != v800
& v8 != v600
& v8 != v500
& v8 != v300
& v8 != v150
& v8 != v100
& v8 != v32
& v0 != v800
& v0 != v600
& v0 != v500
& v0 != v300
& v0 != v150
& v0 != v100
& v0 != v32
& v0 != v8 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',distinct) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ? [X1,X2,X3,X13] :
( leq(v150,X13)
& in_lopen(X13,v0,v300)
& in_lopen(X3,v0,v32)
& leq(v8,X3)
& in_open(X2,v0,v500)
& less(v100,X2)
& in_closed(X1,v800,v800)
& in_closed(X1,v600,v600) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[odrl365]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X45,X46,X47] :
( ( in_closed(X45,X46,X47)
| ~ leq(X45,X47)
| ~ leq(X46,X45) )
& ( ~ in_closed(X45,X46,X47)
| leq(X45,X47) )
& ( ~ in_closed(X45,X46,X47)
| leq(X46,X45) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[in_closed])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( leq(v150,esk4_0)
& in_lopen(esk4_0,v0,v300)
& in_lopen(esk3_0,v0,v32)
& leq(v8,esk3_0)
& in_open(esk2_0,v0,v500)
& less(v100,esk2_0)
& in_closed(esk1_0,v800,v800)
& in_closed(esk1_0,v600,v600) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X20,X21] :
( X20 = X21
| ~ leq(X21,X20)
| ~ leq(X20,X21) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[leq_antisym])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ in_closed(X1,X3,X2)
| leq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
in_closed(esk1_0,v800,v800),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ in_closed(X2,X1,X3)
| leq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
in_closed(esk1_0,v600,v600),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ leq(X2,X1)
| ~ leq(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
leq(esk1_0,v800),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
leq(v800,esk1_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
( v600 != v800
& v500 != v800
& v500 != v600
& v300 != v800
& v300 != v600
& v300 != v500
& v150 != v800
& v150 != v600
& v150 != v500
& v150 != v300
& v100 != v800
& v100 != v600
& v100 != v500
& v100 != v300
& v100 != v150
& v32 != v800
& v32 != v600
& v32 != v500
& v32 != v300
& v32 != v150
& v32 != v100
& v8 != v800
& v8 != v600
& v8 != v500
& v8 != v300
& v8 != v150
& v8 != v100
& v8 != v32
& v0 != v800
& v0 != v600
& v0 != v500
& v0 != v300
& v0 != v150
& v0 != v100
& v0 != v32
& v0 != v8 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[distinct]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
leq(v600,esk1_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = v800,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
leq(esk1_0,v600),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_11]) ).
fof(c_0_19,plain,
( v600 != v800
& v500 != v800
& v500 != v600
& v300 != v800
& v300 != v600
& v300 != v500
& v150 != v800
& v150 != v600
& v150 != v500
& v150 != v300
& v100 != v800
& v100 != v600
& v100 != v500
& v100 != v300
& v100 != v150
& v32 != v800
& v32 != v600
& v32 != v500
& v32 != v300
& v32 != v150
& v32 != v100
& v8 != v800
& v8 != v600
& v8 != v500
& v8 != v300
& v8 != v150
& v8 != v100
& v8 != v32
& v0 != v800
& v0 != v600
& v0 != v500
& v0 != v300
& v0 != v150
& v0 != v100
& v0 != v32
& v0 != v8 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
leq(v600,v800),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
leq(v800,v600),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
v600 != v800,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]),c_0_22]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : MGT080+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.3.1.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.64 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.64 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.64 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.64 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.64 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.64 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.64 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:24:51 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.65 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.65 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.71 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.72 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/0.79 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.21/0.79 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % new_bool_3 with pid 3861173 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.21/0.79 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/0.79 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.79 % Search class: FGUSF-FFMM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.79 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.79 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3861176 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.21/0.79 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/0.79 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.79 % Search class: FGUSF-FFMM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.79 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.79 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.79 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.79 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.21/0.79
% 0.21/0.79 % Proof found!
% 0.21/0.79 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.79 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/0.79 % Parsed axioms : 74
% 0.21/0.79 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 15
% 0.21/0.79 % Initial clauses : 109
% 0.21/0.79 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Initial clauses in saturation : 109
% 0.21/0.79 % Processed clauses : 125
% 0.21/0.79 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.21/0.79 % ...remaining for further processing : 124
% 0.21/0.79 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.21/0.79 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Backward-rewritten : 10
% 0.21/0.79 % Generated clauses : 35
% 0.21/0.79 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 34
% 0.21/0.79 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Paramodulations : 32
% 0.21/0.79 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.21/0.79 % NegExts : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.21/0.79 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Total rewrite steps : 24
% 0.21/0.79 % ...of those cached : 15
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.79 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.79 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.79 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.79 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.79 % Current number of processed clauses : 113
% 0.21/0.79 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 62
% 0.21/0.79 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Negative unit clauses : 37
% 0.21/0.79 % Non-unit-clauses : 14
% 0.21/0.79 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.21/0.79 % ...number of literals in the above : 35
% 0.21/0.79 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Current number of archived clauses : 10
% 0.21/0.79 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 17
% 0.21/0.79 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 17
% 0.21/0.79 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.21/0.79 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 303
% 0.21/0.79 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.21/0.79 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.21/0.79 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/0.79 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3565
% 0.21/0.79 % Search garbage collected termcells : 580
% 0.21/0.79
% 0.21/0.79 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.79 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.21/0.79 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.21/0.79 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.21/0.79 % Maximum resident set size: 3900 pages
% 0.21/0.79
% 0.21/0.79 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.79 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.21/0.79 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.21/0.79 % Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.21/0.79 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.21/0.79 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------