%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM857+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 : n015.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 01:56:47 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 27 ( 16 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 54 ( 9 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 48 ( 21 ~; 20 |; 5 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 0 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('holds(conseq(323), 532, 0)',conjecture,
geq(vmul(vd526,vd529),vmul(vd527,vd530)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(conseq(323), 532, 0)') ).
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 16), 1)',axiom,
! [X78,X79] :
( geq(X79,X78)
<=> ( X79 = X78
| greater(X79,X78) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 16), 1)') ).
fof('ass(cond(318, 0), 0)',axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( ( greater(X1,X2)
& geq(X3,X4) )
| ( geq(X1,X2)
& greater(X3,X4) ) )
=> greater(vmul(X1,X3),vmul(X2,X4)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','ass(cond(318, 0), 0)') ).
fof('holds(conjunct2(antec(323)), 531, 0)',axiom,
geq(vd529,vd530),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(conjunct2(antec(323)), 531, 0)') ).
fof('holds(conjunct1(antec(323)), 528, 0)',axiom,
geq(vd526,vd527),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','holds(conjunct1(antec(323)), 528, 0)') ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ geq(vmul(vd526,vd529),vmul(vd527,vd530)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['holds(conseq(323), 532, 0)']) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ geq(vmul(vd526,vd529),vmul(vd527,vd530)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ geq(vmul(vd526,vd529),vmul(vd527,vd530)),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X133,X134] :
( ( geq(X134,X133)
| X134 != X133 )
& ( geq(X134,X133)
| ~ greater(X134,X133) )
& ( X134 = X133
| greater(X134,X133)
| ~ geq(X134,X133) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 16), 1)'])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ geq(vmul(vd526,vd529),vmul(vd527,vd530)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ greater(X1,X2)
| geq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X118,X119,X120,X121] :
( ( greater(vmul(X118,X120),vmul(X119,X121))
| ~ greater(X118,X119)
| ~ geq(X120,X121) )
& ( greater(vmul(X118,X120),vmul(X119,X121))
| ~ geq(X118,X119)
| ~ greater(X120,X121) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(318, 0), 0)'])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ geq(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2
| greater(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
geq(vd529,vd530),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['holds(conjunct2(antec(323)), 531, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd526,vd529),vmul(vd527,vd530)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ geq(X3,X4)
| ~ greater(X1,X2)
| greater(vmul(X3,X1),vmul(X4,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
geq(vd526,vd527),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['holds(conjunct1(antec(323)), 528, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( greater(vd529,vd530)
| vd530 = vd529 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vd529,vd530),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( X1 != X2
| geq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ greater(X3,X4)
| ~ geq(X1,X2)
| greater(vmul(X3,X1),vmul(X4,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
vd530 = vd529,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
geq(X1,X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( greater(vd526,vd527)
| vd527 = vd526 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vd526,vd527),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),c_0_22])]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
vd527 = vd526,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_25]),c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM857+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:16:51 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.15/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % new_bool_3 with pid 434713 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 434719 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.45
% 0.15/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.45 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 61
% 0.15/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.15/0.45 % Initial clauses : 71
% 0.15/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.15/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 69
% 0.15/0.45 % Processed clauses : 344
% 0.15/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 39
% 0.15/0.45 % ...subsumed : 160
% 0.15/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 145
% 0.15/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 29
% 0.15/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 6
% 0.15/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 18
% 0.15/0.45 % Generated clauses : 1152
% 0.15/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 998
% 0.15/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Paramodulations : 1117
% 0.15/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 33
% 0.15/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 261
% 0.15/0.45 % ...of those cached : 144
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 110
% 0.15/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 35
% 0.15/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.15/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 28
% 0.15/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 43
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 718
% 0.15/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 1373
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 26
% 0.15/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 229
% 0.15/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 215
% 0.15/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 18
% 0.15/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 235
% 0.15/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 37
% 0.15/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 21
% 0.15/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 11121
% 0.15/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 810
% 0.15/0.45
% 0.15/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.15/0.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3944 pages
% 0.15/0.45
% 0.15/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45 % User time : 0.023 s
% 0.15/0.45 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Total time : 0.031 s
% 0.15/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------