%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM837+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n018.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 0.14s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 15 ( 8 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 11 ( 6 ~; 3 |; 1 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 1 sgn 8 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('qe(171)',conjecture,
? [X1] : vd269 = vplus(vd268,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','qe(171)') ).
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)',axiom,
! [X16,X17] :
( less(X17,X16)
<=> ? [X18] : X16 = vplus(X17,X18) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)') ).
fof('holds(conjunct1(170), 270, 0)',axiom,
less(vd268,vd269),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(conjunct1(170), 270, 0)') ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] : vd269 = vplus(vd268,X1),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['qe(171)']) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X34] : vd269 != vplus(vd268,X34),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X35,X36,X38,X39,X40] :
( ( less(X39,X38)
| X38 != vplus(X39,X40) )
& ( X35 = vplus(X36,esk1_2(X35,X36))
| ~ less(X36,X35) ) ),
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)'])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
vd269 != vplus(vd268,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| X2 = vplus(X1,esk1_2(X2,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
less(vd268,vd269),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['holds(conjunct1(170), 270, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
$false,
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])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM837+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:14:29 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.42 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
% 0.14/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % new_bool_3 with pid 836195 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.44 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 836198 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.44 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.44 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 22
% 0.14/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 6
% 0.14/0.44 % Initial clauses : 18
% 0.14/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 18
% 0.14/0.44 % Processed clauses : 28
% 0.14/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.14/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 25
% 0.14/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 13
% 0.14/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Generated clauses : 38
% 0.14/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 16
% 0.14/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Paramodulations : 22
% 0.14/0.44 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.14/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 14
% 0.14/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.14/0.44 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 18
% 0.14/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.14/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 8
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.14/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4
% 0.14/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.14/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.14/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1283
% 0.14/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 304
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.44 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3608 pages
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.44 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------