%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM622+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 01:49:48 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 2.30s 1.07s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.30s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 40 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 9 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 35 ( 11 ~; 7 |; 14 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 7 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 8 ( 0 sgn 6 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
aElementOf0(xp,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(m__4660,hypothesis,
( ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0)
=> ( sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1) = szmzizndt0(sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X1))
& ! [X2] :
( aElementOf0(X2,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X1))
=> sdtlseqdt0(sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1),X2) )
& aElementOf0(sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1),sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X1)) ) )
& szDzozmdt0(xe) = szNzAzT0
& aFunction0(xe) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__4660) ).
fof(m__5461,hypothesis,
( aSubsetOf0(sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xn),sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm))
& ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xn))
=> aElementOf0(X1,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__5461) ).
fof(m__5309,hypothesis,
( sdtlpdtrp0(xe,xn) = xp
& aElementOf0(xn,szNzAzT0)
& aElementOf0(xn,sdtlbdtrb0(xd,szDzizrdt0(xd)))
& sdtlpdtrp0(xd,xn) = szDzizrdt0(xd)
& aElementOf0(xn,szDzozmdt0(xd)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__5309) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(xp,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(xp,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,hypothesis,
! [X235,X236] :
( ( ~ aElementOf0(X235,szNzAzT0)
| sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X235) = szmzizndt0(sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X235)) )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X235,szNzAzT0)
| sdtlseqdt0(sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X235),X236)
| ~ aElementOf0(X236,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X235)) )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X235,szNzAzT0)
| aElementOf0(sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X235),sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X235)) )
& szDzozmdt0(xe) = szNzAzT0
& aFunction0(xe) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[m__4660])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(xp,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_8,hypothesis,
! [X270] :
( aSubsetOf0(sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xn),sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm))
& ( aElementOf0(X270,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm))
| ~ aElementOf0(X270,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xn)) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[m__5461])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
( ~ aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0)
| aElementOf0(sdtlpdtrp0(xe,X1),sdtlpdtrp0(xN,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
sdtlpdtrp0(xe,xn) = xp,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__5309]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xn,szNzAzT0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__5309]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(xp,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
( ~ aElementOf0(X1,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xn))
| aElementOf0(X1,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xm)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xp,sdtlpdtrp0(xN,xn)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM622+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:46:03 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.41 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
% 2.30/1.07 % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.30/1.07 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 2.30/1.07 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 1828296 completed with status 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 2.30/1.07 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 2.30/1.07 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.30/1.07 % No SInE strategy applied
% 2.30/1.07 % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 2.30/1.07 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with 136s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 136s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1828336 completed with status 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 2.30/1.07 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 2.30/1.07 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.30/1.07 % No SInE strategy applied
% 2.30/1.07 % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 2.30/1.07 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 2.30/1.07 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 2.30/1.07 % Preprocessing time : 0.166 s
% 2.30/1.07
% 2.30/1.07 % Proof found!
% 2.30/1.07 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.30/1.07 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.30/1.07 % Parsed axioms : 119
% 2.30/1.07 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Initial clauses : 4932
% 2.30/1.07 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 2.30/1.07 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4925
% 2.30/1.07 % Processed clauses : 372
% 2.30/1.07 % ...of these trivial : 12
% 2.30/1.07 % ...subsumed : 55
% 2.30/1.07 % ...remaining for further processing : 305
% 2.30/1.07 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 15
% 2.30/1.07 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Backward-subsumed : 4
% 2.30/1.07 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 2.30/1.07 % Generated clauses : 357
% 2.30/1.07 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 268
% 2.30/1.07 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 5
% 2.30/1.07 % Paramodulations : 340
% 2.30/1.07 % Factorizations : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % NegExts : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Equation resolutions : 16
% 2.30/1.07 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Total rewrite steps : 346
% 2.30/1.07 % ...of those cached : 285
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional check models : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 2.30/1.07 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 2.30/1.07 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 2.30/1.07 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 2.30/1.07 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 2.30/1.07 % Current number of processed clauses : 284
% 2.30/1.07 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 111
% 2.30/1.07 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Negative unit clauses : 29
% 2.30/1.07 % Non-unit-clauses : 144
% 2.30/1.07 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4811
% 2.30/1.07 % ...number of literals in the above : 55931
% 2.30/1.07 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 2.30/1.07 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2945
% 2.30/1.07 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2572
% 2.30/1.07 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 31
% 2.30/1.07 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 786
% 2.30/1.07 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 2.30/1.07 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 2.30/1.07 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Condensation successes : 0
% 2.30/1.07 % Termbank termtop insertions : 387854
% 2.30/1.07 % Search garbage collected termcells : 32085
% 2.30/1.07
% 2.30/1.07 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.30/1.07 % User time : 0.553 s
% 2.30/1.07 % System time : 0.049 s
% 2.30/1.07 % Total time : 0.602 s
% 2.30/1.07 % Maximum resident set size: 16120 pages
% 2.30/1.07
% 2.30/1.07 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.30/1.07 % User time : 1.100 s
% 2.30/1.07 % System time : 0.109 s
% 2.30/1.07 % Total time : 1.209 s
% 2.30/1.07 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 2.30/1.07 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------