%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM852+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 : n009.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 01:50:51 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.11s 10.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 17 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 35 ( 14 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 23 ( 12 ~; 7 |; 2 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 44 ( 3 sgn 24 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq_conjunct2(conseq(304))), 484, 0)',conjecture,
greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq_conjunct2(conseq(304))), 484, 0)') ).
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)',axiom,
! [X24,X25] :
( greater(X25,X24)
<=> ? [X26] : X25 = vplus(X24,X26) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)') ).
fof('ass(cond(281, 0), 0)',axiom,
! [X8,X9,X10] : vmul(X8,vplus(X9,X10)) = vplus(vmul(X8,X9),vmul(X8,X10)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','ass(cond(281, 0), 0)') ).
fof('ass(cond(270, 0), 0)',axiom,
! [X11,X12] : vmul(X11,X12) = vmul(X12,X11),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','ass(cond(270, 0), 0)') ).
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)',axiom,
! [X21,X22] :
( less(X22,X21)
<=> ? [X23] : X21 = vplus(X22,X23) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)') ).
fof('holds(antec(304), 482, 0)',axiom,
less(vd480,vd481),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(antec(304), 482, 0)') ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq_conjunct2(conseq(304))), 484, 0)']) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X29,X30,X32,X33,X34] :
( ( greater(X33,X32)
| X33 != vplus(X32,X34) )
& ( X30 = vplus(X29,esk1_2(X29,X30))
| ~ greater(X30,X29) ) ),
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)'])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( X1 != vplus(X2,X3)
| greater(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X38,X39,X40] : vmul(X38,vplus(X39,X40)) = vplus(vmul(X38,X39),vmul(X38,X40)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(281, 0), 0)']) ).
fof(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X41,X42] : vmul(X41,X42) = vmul(X42,X41),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(270, 0), 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
greater(vplus(X1,X2),X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
vmul(X1,vplus(X2,X3)) = vplus(vmul(X1,X2),vmul(X1,X3)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X51,X52,X54,X55,X56] :
( ( less(X55,X54)
| X54 != vplus(X55,X56) )
& ( X51 = vplus(X52,esk2_2(X51,X52))
| ~ less(X52,X51) ) ),
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_16,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
vmul(X1,X2) = vmul(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
greater(vmul(X1,vplus(X2,X3)),vmul(X1,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| X2 = vplus(X1,esk2_2(X2,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd469,vd481),vmul(vd469,vd480)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ less(X3,X2)
| greater(vmul(X1,X2),vmul(X1,X3)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
less(vd480,vd481),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['holds(antec(304), 482, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM852+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/10.40 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.11/10.40 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/10.40 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/10.40 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/10.40 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/10.40 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/10.40 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/10.40 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:13:38 UTC 2026
% 0.11/10.41 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/10.41 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/10.45 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/10.45 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
% 0.11/10.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/10.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/10.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 712896 completed with status 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.11/10.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/10.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/10.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/10.47 % Search class: FGHSS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/10.47 % partial match(1): FGUSS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/10.47 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 712903 completed with status 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/10.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/10.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/10.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/10.47 % Search class: FGHSS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/10.47 % partial match(1): FGUSS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/10.47 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/10.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/10.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/10.47
% 0.11/10.47 % Proof found!
% 0.11/10.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/10.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/10.47 % Parsed axioms : 20
% 0.11/10.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.11/10.47 % Initial clauses : 21
% 0.11/10.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.11/10.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 20
% 0.11/10.47 % Processed clauses : 92
% 0.11/10.47 % ...of these trivial : 12
% 0.11/10.47 % ...subsumed : 37
% 0.11/10.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 43
% 0.11/10.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.11/10.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Generated clauses : 454
% 0.11/10.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 388
% 0.11/10.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Paramodulations : 448
% 0.11/10.47 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.11/10.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.11/10.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Total rewrite steps : 188
% 0.11/10.47 % ...of those cached : 129
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/10.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/10.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/10.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/10.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/10.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 39
% 0.11/10.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 14
% 0.11/10.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.11/10.47 % Negative unit clauses : 9
% 0.11/10.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 12
% 0.11/10.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 314
% 0.11/10.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 391
% 0.11/10.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 18
% 0.11/10.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 18
% 0.11/10.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 6
% 0.11/10.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 15
% 0.11/10.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 16
% 0.11/10.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 12
% 0.11/10.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/10.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4554
% 0.11/10.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 208
% 0.11/10.47
% 0.11/10.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/10.47 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.11/10.47 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.11/10.47 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.11/10.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3656 pages
% 0.11/10.47
% 0.11/10.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/10.47 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.11/10.47 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.11/10.47 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.11/10.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/10.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------