%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM304+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 : n001.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 0.15s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 12 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 36 ( 11 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 37 ( 20 ~; 9 |; 5 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 ( 10 sgn 15 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(something_not_n12,conjecture,
? [X1] : X1 != n12,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',something_not_n12) ).
fof(less_property,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( less(X1,X2)
<=> ( X2 != X1
& ~ less(X2,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+1.ax',less_property) ).
fof(rdn0,axiom,
rdn_translate(n0,rdn_pos(rdnn(n0))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdn0) ).
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(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] : X1 != n12,
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[something_not_n12]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] : X1 != n12,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X154] : X154 = n12,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
X1 = n12,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( less(X1,X2)
<=> ( X2 != X1
& ~ less(X2,X1) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[less_property]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
rdn_translate(n0,rdn_pos(rdnn(n0))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn0]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
X1 = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X61,X62] :
( ( less(X61,X62)
| X62 = X61
| less(X62,X61) )
& ( ~ less(X61,X62)
| X62 != X61 )
& ( ~ less(X61,X62)
| ~ less(X62,X61) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X53,X54,X55,X56] :
( less(X53,X54)
| ~ rdn_translate(X54,rdn_pos(X56))
| ~ rdn_translate(X53,rdn_neg(X55)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[less_entry_point_neg_pos])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
rdn_translate(n0,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ less(X2,X1)
| X1 != X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ rdn_translate(X3,rdn_pos(X4))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_neg(X2))
| less(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
rdn_translate(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
~ less(X1,X2),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_16])]),c_0_17]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM304+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n001.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 02:26:59 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.15/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with pid 1989409 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Result found by G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.45 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 3 cores with 900 seconds (900 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 82s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 91s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4d with 82s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1989420 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.45 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 3 cores with 900 seconds (900 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 82s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.45
% 0.15/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.45 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 402
% 0.15/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Initial clauses : 407
% 0.15/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 407
% 0.15/0.45 % Processed clauses : 88
% 0.15/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 70
% 0.15/0.45 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.15/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 14
% 0.15/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.15/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.15/0.45 % Generated clauses : 24
% 0.15/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 23
% 0.15/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Paramodulations : 24
% 0.15/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 189
% 0.15/0.45 % ...of those cached : 114
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.15/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.15/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 326
% 0.15/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 389
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.15/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 296
% 0.15/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 12
% 0.15/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.15/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 19225
% 0.15/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 765
% 0.15/0.45
% 0.15/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.45 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4496 pages
% 0.15/0.45
% 0.15/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45 % User time : 0.025 s
% 0.15/0.45 % System time : 0.017 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Total time : 0.042 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.15/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------