%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM618+1 : 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 : n020.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 01:49:47 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 27 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 26 ( 11 ~; 7 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 0 sgn 3 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
? [X1] :
( xx = sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1)
& aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(m__4982,hypothesis,
! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xO)
=> ? [X2] :
( sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X2) = X1
& aElementOf0(X2,sdtlbdtrb0(xd,szDzizrdt0(xd)))
& aElementOf0(X2,szNzAzT0) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__4982) ).
fof(m__5365,hypothesis,
( aElementOf0(xx,xO)
& aElementOf0(xx,szNzAzT0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__5365) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] :
( xx = sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1)
& aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X39] :
( xx != sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X39)
| ~ aElementOf0(X39,szNzAzT0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,hypothesis,
! [X37] :
( ( ~ aElementOf0(X37,xO)
| sdtlpdtrp0(xe,esk6_1(X37)) = X37 )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X37,xO)
| aElementOf0(esk6_1(X37),sdtlbdtrb0(xd,szDzizrdt0(xd))) )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X37,xO)
| aElementOf0(esk6_1(X37),szNzAzT0) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[m__4982])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( xx != sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1)
| ~ aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
( ~ aElementOf0(X1,xO)
| sdtlpdtrp0(xe,esk6_1(X1)) = X1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xx,xO),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__5365]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(esk6_1(xx),szNzAzT0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7])]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
( ~ aElementOf0(X1,xO)
| aElementOf0(esk6_1(X1),szNzAzT0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : NUM618+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:45:48 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41 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
% 0.14/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % new_bool_1 with pid 1827558 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.45 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1827563 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.45 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.45
% 0.14/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.45 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 115
% 0.14/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.14/0.45 % Initial clauses : 213
% 0.14/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 0.14/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 206
% 0.14/0.45 % Processed clauses : 133
% 0.14/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 6
% 0.14/0.45 % ...subsumed : 4
% 0.14/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 123
% 0.14/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 7
% 0.14/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.14/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.14/0.45 % Generated clauses : 85
% 0.14/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 57
% 0.14/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Paramodulations : 78
% 0.14/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 7
% 0.14/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 91
% 0.14/0.45 % ...of those cached : 62
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 115
% 0.14/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 69
% 0.14/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 11
% 0.14/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 35
% 0.14/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 128
% 0.14/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 603
% 0.14/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 191
% 0.14/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 159
% 0.14/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.14/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 104
% 0.14/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.14/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.14/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 16725
% 0.14/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 3562
% 0.14/0.45
% 0.14/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.45 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.14/0.45 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.45 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.14/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4288 pages
% 0.14/0.45
% 0.14/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.45 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.14/0.45 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.45 % Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.14/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------