%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM846+1 : 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 : n007.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 01:50:49 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.10s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 11 ( 10 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 4 ( 4 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 6 ( 0 sgn 4 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('holds(286, 441, 2)',conjecture,
vplus(vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)),vd436) = vplus(vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),vd436),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(286, 441, 2)') ).
fof('ass(cond(61, 0), 0)',axiom,
! [X71,X72] : vplus(X72,X71) = vplus(X71,X72),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','ass(cond(61, 0), 0)') ).
fof('holds(285, 440, 0)',axiom,
vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)) = vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(285, 440, 0)') ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
vplus(vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)),vd436) != vplus(vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),vd436),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['holds(286, 441, 2)']) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
vplus(vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)),vd436) != vplus(vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),vd436),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
vplus(vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)),vd436) != vplus(vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),vd436),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X113,X114] : vplus(X114,X113) = vplus(X113,X114),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(61, 0), 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
vplus(vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)),vd436) != vplus(vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),vd436),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
vplus(X1,X2) = vplus(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
vmul(vd436,vplus(vd437,vd439)) = vplus(vmul(vd436,vd437),vmul(vd436,vd439)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['holds(285, 440, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM846+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:10:50 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.43 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
% 0.10/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 39163 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.47 % Search class: FGHPM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.47 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 39166 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.47 % Search class: FGHPM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.47 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.47
% 0.10/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.10/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 55
% 0.10/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 27
% 0.10/0.47 % Initial clauses : 30
% 0.10/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.10/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 29
% 0.10/0.47 % Processed clauses : 132
% 0.10/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 9
% 0.10/0.47 % ...subsumed : 73
% 0.10/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 49
% 0.10/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 11
% 0.10/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 4
% 0.10/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.10/0.47 % Generated clauses : 407
% 0.10/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 387
% 0.10/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Paramodulations : 393
% 0.10/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 14
% 0.10/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 107
% 0.10/0.47 % ...of those cached : 60
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 37
% 0.10/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 10
% 0.10/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.10/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 18
% 0.10/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 276
% 0.10/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 372
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.10/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5
% 0.10/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.10/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.10/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 45
% 0.10/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 61
% 0.10/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 19
% 0.10/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3955
% 0.10/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 403
% 0.10/0.47
% 0.10/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.47 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.10/0.47 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3720 pages
% 0.10/0.47
% 0.10/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.47 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.10/0.47 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.10/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------