%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM318+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 01:44:40 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.11s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 21 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 16 ( 9 ~; 5 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn 6 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(sum_n5_nn5_n0,conjecture,
sum(n5,nn5,n0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sum_n5_nn5_n0) ).
fof(sum_entry_point_posx_negx,axiom,
! [X13,X14,X10] :
( ( rdn_translate(X14,rdn_neg(X10))
& rdn_translate(X13,rdn_pos(X10)) )
=> sum(X13,X14,n0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+2.ax',sum_entry_point_posx_negx) ).
fof(rdnn5,axiom,
rdn_translate(nn5,rdn_neg(rdnn(n5))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdnn5) ).
fof(rdn5,axiom,
rdn_translate(n5,rdn_pos(rdnn(n5))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdn5) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ sum(n5,nn5,n0),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[sum_n5_nn5_n0]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X57,X58,X59] :
( sum(X57,X58,n0)
| ~ rdn_translate(X58,rdn_neg(X59))
| ~ rdn_translate(X57,rdn_pos(X59)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[sum_entry_point_posx_negx])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ sum(n5,nn5,n0),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ rdn_translate(X3,rdn_neg(X2))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X2))
| sum(X1,X3,n0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
rdn_translate(nn5,rdn_neg(rdnn(n5))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdnn5]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ sum(n5,nn5,n0),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(rdnn(n5)))
| sum(X1,nn5,n0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
rdn_translate(n5,rdn_pos(rdnn(n5))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ sum(n5,nn5,n0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : NUM318+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:21:55 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.40 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
% 0.11/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % new_bool_1 with pid 762066 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.44 % Search class: FHUSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44 % partial match(1): FHUNF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 361s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 762068 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.44 % Search class: FHUSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44 % partial match(1): FHUNF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.11/0.44
% 0.11/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.44 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 402
% 0.11/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 261
% 0.11/0.44 % Initial clauses : 141
% 0.11/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 141
% 0.11/0.44 % Processed clauses : 133
% 0.11/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 133
% 0.11/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Generated clauses : 21
% 0.11/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 20
% 0.11/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Paramodulations : 21
% 0.11/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 133
% 0.11/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 120
% 0.11/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.11/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 12
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 28
% 0.11/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 94
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 42
% 0.11/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 30
% 0.11/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 10914
% 0.11/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1755
% 0.11/0.44
% 0.11/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.44 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.11/0.44 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4504 pages
% 0.11/0.44
% 0.11/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.44 % User time : 0.019 s
% 0.11/0.44 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Total time : 0.029 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------