%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM395+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 01:48:58 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.09s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 19 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 8 ~; 4 |; 2 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 3 ( 0 sgn 2 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t27_ordinal1,conjecture,
ordinal(empty_set),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t27_ordinal1) ).
fof(cc2_ordinal1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( epsilon_connected(X1)
& epsilon_transitive(X1) )
=> ordinal(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cc2_ordinal1) ).
fof(l18_ordinal1,axiom,
( epsilon_connected(empty_set)
& epsilon_transitive(empty_set) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l18_ordinal1) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ordinal(empty_set),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t27_ordinal1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ordinal(empty_set),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4] :
( ordinal(X4)
| ~ epsilon_connected(X4)
| ~ epsilon_transitive(X4) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[cc2_ordinal1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ordinal(empty_set),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ epsilon_connected(X1)
| ~ epsilon_transitive(X1)
| ordinal(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
epsilon_connected(empty_set),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[l18_ordinal1]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
epsilon_transitive(empty_set),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[l18_ordinal1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ ordinal(empty_set),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),c_0_10]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM395+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.37 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:27:20 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41 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
% 0.09/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % sh5l with pid 1489831 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.09/0.43 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.09/0.43 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSM11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1489832 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.09/0.43 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.09/0.43 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSM11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 29
% 0.09/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.09/0.43 % Initial clauses : 49
% 0.09/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.09/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 47
% 0.09/0.43 % Processed clauses : 47
% 0.09/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.09/0.43 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.09/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 41
% 0.09/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.09/0.43 % Generated clauses : 7
% 0.09/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.09/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Paramodulations : 7
% 0.09/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 17
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of those cached : 9
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 35
% 0.09/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 24
% 0.09/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 8
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5
% 0.09/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 14
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.09/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1702
% 0.09/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 257
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.44 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.09/0.44 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.44 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.09/0.44 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.09/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------