%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM302+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n019.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 01:44:39 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.11s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 8 ~; 5 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 4 sgn 9 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(less_entry_point_neg_pos,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X10,X11] :
( ( rdn_translate(X2,rdn_pos(X11))
& rdn_translate(X1,rdn_neg(X10)) )
=> less(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+1.ax',less_entry_point_neg_pos) ).
fof(nn2_less_something,conjecture,
? [X1] : less(nn2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',nn2_less_something) ).
fof(rdn9,axiom,
rdn_translate(n9,rdn_pos(rdnn(n9))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdn9) ).
fof(rdnn2,axiom,
rdn_translate(nn2,rdn_neg(rdnn(n2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdnn2) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X38,X39,X40,X41] :
( less(X38,X39)
| ~ rdn_translate(X39,rdn_pos(X41))
| ~ rdn_translate(X38,rdn_neg(X40)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[less_entry_point_neg_pos])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] : less(nn2,X1),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[nn2_less_something]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ rdn_translate(X3,rdn_pos(X4))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_neg(X2))
| less(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
rdn_translate(n9,rdn_pos(rdnn(n9))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn9]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X33] : ~ less(nn2,X33),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_neg(X2))
| less(X1,n9) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
rdn_translate(nn2,rdn_neg(rdnn(n2))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdnn2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ less(nn2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM302+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.38 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:21:35 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.11/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % new_bool_1 with pid 1478595 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.11/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.46 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 55s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 61s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1478597 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.46 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.11/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 55s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.11/0.46
% 0.11/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.46 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 402
% 0.11/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 275
% 0.11/0.46 % Initial clauses : 129
% 0.11/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 129
% 0.11/0.46 % Processed clauses : 34
% 0.11/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.11/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 32
% 0.11/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.11/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Generated clauses : 19
% 0.11/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 14
% 0.11/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Paramodulations : 16
% 0.11/0.46 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.11/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.11/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 31
% 0.11/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 24
% 0.11/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.11/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 5
% 0.11/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 109
% 0.11/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 127
% 0.11/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 8
% 0.11/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.11/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.11/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.11/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 8496
% 0.11/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1549
% 0.11/0.46
% 0.11/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.46 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.46 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.46 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.11/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4508 pages
% 0.11/0.46
% 0.11/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.46 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.11/0.46 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.11/0.46 % Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.11/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.11/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------