%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : MGT084+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.3.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n005.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 01:28:09 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.10s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 62 ( 8 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 61 ( 21 ~; 16 |; 21 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 7 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 31 ( 1 sgn 17 !; 6 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(odrl432,conjecture,
~ ? [X1,X2,X3] :
( leq(v200,X3)
& in_lopen(X3,v0,v200)
& less(v400,X2)
& in_lopen(X2,v0,v400)
& leq(v600,X1)
& in_lopen(X1,v0,v600) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',odrl432) ).
fof(in_lopen,axiom,
! [X1,X4,X5] :
( in_lopen(X1,X4,X5)
<=> ( leq(X1,X5)
& less(X4,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+2.ax',in_lopen) ).
fof(leq_antisym,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( leq(X2,X1)
& leq(X1,X2) )
=> X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+0.ax',leq_antisym) ).
fof(leq_def,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( leq(X1,X2)
<=> ( X1 = X2
| less(X1,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+0.ax',leq_def) ).
fof(irreflexive,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ less(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/MGT002+0.ax',irreflexive) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ? [X1,X2,X3] :
( leq(v200,X3)
& in_lopen(X3,v0,v200)
& less(v400,X2)
& in_lopen(X2,v0,v400)
& leq(v600,X1)
& in_lopen(X1,v0,v600) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[odrl432]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X31,X32,X33] :
( ( in_lopen(X31,X32,X33)
| ~ leq(X31,X33)
| ~ less(X32,X31) )
& ( ~ in_lopen(X31,X32,X33)
| leq(X31,X33) )
& ( ~ in_lopen(X31,X32,X33)
| less(X32,X31) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[in_lopen])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( leq(v200,esk3_0)
& in_lopen(esk3_0,v0,v200)
& less(v400,esk2_0)
& in_lopen(esk2_0,v0,v400)
& leq(v600,esk1_0)
& in_lopen(esk1_0,v0,v600) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X18,X19] :
( X18 = X19
| ~ leq(X19,X18)
| ~ leq(X18,X19) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[leq_antisym])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ in_lopen(X1,X3,X2)
| leq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
in_lopen(esk2_0,v0,v400),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ leq(X2,X1)
| ~ leq(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
leq(esk2_0,v400),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X16,X17] :
( ( leq(X16,X17)
| X16 != X17 )
& ( leq(X16,X17)
| ~ less(X16,X17) )
& ( X16 = X17
| less(X16,X17)
| ~ leq(X16,X17) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[leq_def])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X1] : ~ less(X1,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[irreflexive]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ leq(v400,esk2_0)
| esk2_0 = v400 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| leq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
less(v400,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_18,plain,
! [X34] : ~ less(X34,X34),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 = v400,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
~ less(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_19]),c_0_20]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : MGT084+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.3.1.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:25:03 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.40 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.10/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.10/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % new_bool_1 with pid 2246360 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.10/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.43 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.43 % partial match(1): FGUNF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2246363 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.43 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.43 % partial match(1): FGUNF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.43
% 0.10/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.10/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 39
% 0.10/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 17
% 0.10/0.43 % Initial clauses : 36
% 0.10/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 36
% 0.10/0.43 % Processed clauses : 50
% 0.10/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.10/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 49
% 0.10/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.10/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 18
% 0.10/0.43 % Generated clauses : 43
% 0.10/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 39
% 0.10/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Paramodulations : 40
% 0.10/0.43 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.10/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.10/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 42
% 0.10/0.43 % ...of those cached : 28
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 30
% 0.10/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 0.10/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.10/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 7
% 0.10/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 22
% 0.10/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 58
% 0.10/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 18
% 0.10/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5
% 0.10/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.10/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.10/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.10/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.10/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.10/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1912
% 0.10/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 343
% 0.10/0.43
% 0.10/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.43 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.10/0.43 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.10/0.43 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.10/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3672 pages
% 0.10/0.43
% 0.10/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.43 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.10/0.43 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.43 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.10/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.10/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------