%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM739_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 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 01:50:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 0.57s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 32 ( 11 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 64 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 61 ( 29 ~; 20 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 11 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 4 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 ( 0 sgn 32 !; 0 ?; 32 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
frac: $tType ).
tff(decl_23,type,
x: frac ).
tff(decl_24,type,
y: frac ).
tff(decl_25,type,
z: frac ).
tff(decl_26,type,
u: frac ).
tff(decl_27,type,
moref: ( frac * frac ) > $o ).
tff(decl_28,type,
eq: ( frac * frac ) > $o ).
tff(satz46,conjecture,
( ~ moref(z,u)
=> eq(z,u) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz46) ).
tff(satz44,axiom,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac,X5: frac] :
( moref(X2,X3)
=> ( eq(X2,X4)
=> ( eq(X3,X5)
=> moref(X4,X5) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz44) ).
tff(m,axiom,
( ~ moref(x,y)
=> eq(x,y) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m) ).
tff(f,axiom,
eq(y,u),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f) ).
tff(satz39,axiom,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
( eq(X2,X3)
=> ( eq(X3,X4)
=> eq(X2,X4) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz39) ).
tff(satz38,axiom,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac] :
( eq(X2,X3)
=> eq(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz38) ).
tff(e,axiom,
eq(x,z),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',e) ).
tff(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ~ moref(z,u)
=> eq(z,u) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz46]) ).
tff(c_0_8,plain,
! [X11: frac,X12: frac,X13: frac,X14: frac] :
( moref(X13,X14)
| ~ eq(X12,X14)
| ~ eq(X11,X13)
| ~ moref(X11,X12) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz44])])]) ).
tff(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ moref(x,y)
=> eq(x,y) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m]) ).
tff(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ~ moref(z,u)
=> eq(z,u) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
tcf(c_0_11,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac,X5: frac] :
( ~ eq(X3,X5)
| ~ eq(X2,X4)
| ~ moref(X2,X3)
| moref(X4,X5) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
tcf(c_0_12,plain,
eq(y,u),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[f]) ).
tff(c_0_13,plain,
( eq(x,y)
| moref(x,y) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
tff(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( ~ eq(z,u)
& ~ moref(z,u) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])]) ).
tcf(c_0_15,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac] :
( ~ moref(X3,y)
| ~ eq(X3,X2)
| moref(X2,u) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
tcf(c_0_16,plain,
( eq(x,y)
| moref(x,y) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
tff(c_0_17,plain,
! [X6: frac,X7: frac,X8: frac] :
( eq(X6,X8)
| ~ eq(X7,X8)
| ~ eq(X6,X7) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz39])])]) ).
tff(c_0_18,plain,
! [X9: frac,X10: frac] :
( eq(X10,X9)
| ~ eq(X9,X10) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz38])])]) ).
tcf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ moref(z,u),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
tcf(c_0_20,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ~ eq(x,X2)
| moref(X2,u)
| eq(x,y) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
tcf(c_0_21,plain,
eq(x,z),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[e]) ).
tcf(c_0_22,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
( ~ eq(X3,X4)
| ~ eq(X2,X3)
| eq(X2,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
tcf(c_0_23,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac] :
( ~ eq(X2,X3)
| eq(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
tcf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
eq(x,y),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]) ).
tcf(c_0_25,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ~ eq(X2,x)
| eq(X2,z) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_21]) ).
tcf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
eq(y,x),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]) ).
tcf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
~ eq(z,u),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
tcf(c_0_28,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ~ eq(X2,y)
| eq(X2,u) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_12]) ).
tcf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
eq(y,z),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]) ).
tcf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
~ eq(z,y),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_29]),c_0_30]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : NUM739_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.46 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:00:35 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.47 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.47 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.51 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.52 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
% 0.25/0.57 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % new_bool_3 with pid 1546980 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.57 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1546984 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.57 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.57 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/0.57 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.57 % Parsed axioms : 15
% 0.25/0.57 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 8
% 0.25/0.57 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.25/0.57 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.25/0.57 % Processed clauses : 39
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % ...remaining for further processing : 37
% 0.25/0.57 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Generated clauses : 82
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 57
% 0.25/0.57 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Paramodulations : 82
% 0.25/0.57 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Total rewrite steps : 14
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of those cached : 6
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of processed clauses : 35
% 0.25/0.57 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.25/0.57 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.25/0.57 % Non-unit-clauses : 20
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 26
% 0.25/0.57 % ...number of literals in the above : 75
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 61
% 0.25/0.57 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 59
% 0.25/0.57 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.25/0.57 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.25/0.57 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.25/0.57 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1383
% 0.25/0.57 % Search garbage collected termcells : 74
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.57 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.57 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.57 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.25/0.57 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.57 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------