%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM836+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 01:50:47 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 43 ( 16 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 47 ( 27 ~; 15 |; 3 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 46 ( 7 sgn 20 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('ass(cond(goal(88), 0), 2)',axiom,
! [X7,X8] :
( ~ ? [X10] : X8 = vplus(X7,X10)
| ~ ? [X9] : X7 = vplus(X8,X9) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','ass(cond(goal(88), 0), 2)') ).
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)',axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( less(X2,X1)
<=> ? [X3] : X1 = vplus(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)') ).
fof('dis(ex(cond(conseq(131), 0), 1))',conjecture,
( ~ less(vd203,vd204)
| ~ greater(vd203,vd204) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','dis(ex(cond(conseq(131), 0), 1))') ).
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)',axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( greater(X5,X4)
<=> ? [X6] : X5 = vplus(X4,X6) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)') ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X38,X39,X40,X41] :
( X39 != vplus(X38,X41)
| X38 != vplus(X39,X40) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(goal(88), 0), 2)'])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( X2 != vplus(X1,X4)
| X1 != vplus(X2,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X19,X20,X22,X23,X24] :
( ( less(X23,X22)
| X22 != vplus(X23,X24) )
& ( X19 = vplus(X20,esk1_2(X19,X20))
| ~ less(X20,X19) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)'])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ~ less(vd203,vd204)
| ~ greater(vd203,vd204) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['dis(ex(cond(conseq(131), 0), 1))']) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
vplus(vplus(X1,X2),X3) != X1,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| X2 = vplus(X1,esk1_2(X2,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ~ less(vd203,vd204)
| ~ greater(vd203,vd204) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
~ less(vplus(X1,X2),X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( less(vd203,vd204)
& greater(vd203,vd204) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( X1 != vplus(X2,X3)
| less(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X25,X26,X28,X29,X30] :
( ( greater(X29,X28)
| X29 != vplus(X28,X30) )
& ( X26 = vplus(X25,esk2_2(X25,X26))
| ~ greater(X26,X25) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)'])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ less(X2,X1)
| ~ less(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
less(vd203,vd204),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
less(X1,vplus(X1,X2)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ greater(X1,X2)
| X1 = vplus(X2,esk2_2(X2,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ less(vd204,vd203),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ greater(X2,X1)
| less(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
greater(vd203,vd204),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : NUM836+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:12:34 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40 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
% 0.13/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % new_bool_1 with pid 3018039 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3018041 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 11
% 0.13/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Initial clauses : 13
% 0.13/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 13
% 0.13/0.42 % Processed clauses : 28
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % ...subsumed : 4
% 0.13/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.13/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 15
% 0.13/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Generated clauses : 43
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 25
% 0.13/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Paramodulations : 27
% 0.13/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 16
% 0.13/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 7
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 19
% 0.13/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.13/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 6
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 9
% 0.13/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 14
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 952
% 0.13/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 221
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.42 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.42 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------