%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM427+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 01:49:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 27 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 24 ( 10 ~; 8 |; 5 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 7 ( 0 sgn 3 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
( sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0(xb,xa,xq)
| aDivisorOf0(xq,sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa)))
| ? [X1] :
( sdtasdt0(xq,X1) = sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa))
& aInteger0(X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(m__767,hypothesis,
sdtasdt0(xq,smndt0(xn)) = sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__767) ).
fof(mIntNeg,axiom,
! [X1] :
( aInteger0(X1)
=> aInteger0(smndt0(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mIntNeg) ).
fof(m__747,hypothesis,
( sdtasdt0(xq,xn) = sdtpldt0(xa,smndt0(xb))
& aInteger0(xn) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__747) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ( sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0(xb,xa,xq)
| aDivisorOf0(xq,sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa)))
| ? [X1] :
( sdtasdt0(xq,X1) = sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa))
& aInteger0(X1) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X5] :
( ~ sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0(xb,xa,xq)
& ~ aDivisorOf0(xq,sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa)))
& ( sdtasdt0(xq,X5) != sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa))
| ~ aInteger0(X5) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( sdtasdt0(xq,X1) != sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa))
| ~ aInteger0(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
sdtasdt0(xq,smndt0(xn)) = sdtpldt0(xb,smndt0(xa)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__767]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X32] :
( aInteger0(smndt0(X32))
| ~ aInteger0(X32) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[mIntNeg])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
~ aInteger0(smndt0(xn)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ aInteger0(X1)
| aInteger0(smndt0(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
aInteger0(xn),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__747]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : NUM427+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.45 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.45 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.45 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.45 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.45 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.45 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:28:40 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.54 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
% 0.23/0.62 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % new_bool_3 with pid 771232 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.62 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.62 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % SubtermCWHack with pid 771235 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.62 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.62 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.62 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.23/0.62
% 0.23/0.62 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.62 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.62 % Parsed axioms : 25
% 0.23/0.62 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 3
% 0.23/0.62 % Initial clauses : 40
% 0.23/0.62 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.23/0.62 % Initial clauses in saturation : 39
% 0.23/0.62 % Processed clauses : 38
% 0.23/0.62 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.23/0.62 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % ...remaining for further processing : 36
% 0.23/0.62 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.23/0.62 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.23/0.62 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.23/0.62 % Generated clauses : 22
% 0.23/0.62 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11
% 0.23/0.62 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Paramodulations : 21
% 0.23/0.62 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.23/0.62 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Total rewrite steps : 36
% 0.23/0.62 % ...of those cached : 26
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.62 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.62 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.62 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.62 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.62 % Current number of processed clauses : 31
% 0.23/0.62 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 14
% 0.23/0.62 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.62 % Non-unit-clauses : 13
% 0.23/0.62 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 12
% 0.23/0.62 % ...number of literals in the above : 52
% 0.23/0.62 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.62 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 16
% 0.23/0.62 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14
% 0.23/0.62 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14
% 0.23/0.62 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.23/0.62 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.23/0.62 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.62 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2813
% 0.23/0.62 % Search garbage collected termcells : 450
% 0.23/0.62
% 0.23/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.62 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.23/0.62 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.23/0.62 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.23/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 3656 pages
% 0.23/0.62
% 0.23/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.62 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.23/0.62 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.23/0.62 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.23/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.23/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------