%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : RNG124+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n003.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 02:05:56 PM UTC 2026
% Result : ContradictoryAxioms 0.16s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 33 ( 14 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 34 ( 15 ~; 6 |; 11 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 4 ( 0 sgn 3 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__2673,hypothesis,
xr != sz00,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2673) ).
fof(m__2273,hypothesis,
( ! [X1] :
( ( X1 != sz00
& aElementOf0(X1,xI) )
=> ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X1),sbrdtbr0(xu)) )
& xu != sz00
& aElementOf0(xu,xI) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2273) ).
fof(m__2666,hypothesis,
( ( iLess0(sbrdtbr0(xr),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| xr = sz00 )
& xb = sdtpldt0(sdtasdt0(xq,xu),xr)
& aElement0(xr)
& aElement0(xq) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2666) ).
fof(m__2729,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xr,xI),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2729) ).
fof(c_0_4,hypothesis,
xr != sz00,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m__2673]) ).
fof(c_0_5,hypothesis,
( ! [X1] :
( ( X1 != sz00
& aElementOf0(X1,xI) )
=> ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X1),sbrdtbr0(xu)) )
& xu != sz00
& aElementOf0(xu,xI) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m__2273]) ).
fof(c_0_6,hypothesis,
xr != sz00,
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_7,hypothesis,
! [X117] :
( ( ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X117),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| X117 = sz00
| ~ aElementOf0(X117,xI) )
& xu != sz00
& aElementOf0(xu,xI) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
( iLess0(sbrdtbr0(xr),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| xr = sz00 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__2666]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
xr != sz00,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
( ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X1),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| ~ aElementOf0(X1,xI)
| X1 = sz00 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
iLess0(sbrdtbr0(xr),sbrdtbr0(xu)),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xr,xI),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__2729]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),c_0_9]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : RNG124+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n003.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 04:23:31 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.42 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
% 0.16/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 3396355 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.16/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.16/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.16/0.45 % Search class: FGHSF-FSMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3396363 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.16/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.16/0.45 % Search class: FGHSF-FSMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.16/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/0.45
% 0.16/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.45 % SZS status ContradictoryAxioms
% 0.16/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 56
% 0.16/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Initial clauses : 124
% 0.16/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.16/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 119
% 0.16/0.45 % Processed clauses : 114
% 0.16/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 8
% 0.16/0.45 % ...subsumed : 19
% 0.16/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 87
% 0.16/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% 0.16/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.16/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.16/0.45 % Generated clauses : 103
% 0.16/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 65
% 0.16/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Paramodulations : 100
% 0.16/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 3
% 0.16/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 128
% 0.16/0.45 % ...of those cached : 108
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 82
% 0.16/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 38
% 0.16/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.16/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 38
% 0.16/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 70
% 0.16/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 328
% 0.16/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.16/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 176
% 0.16/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 138
% 0.16/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 19
% 0.16/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 0.16/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.16/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.16/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 9335
% 0.16/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1912
% 0.16/0.45
% 0.16/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.45 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.16/0.45 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.16/0.45 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.16/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3956 pages
% 0.16/0.45
% 0.16/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.45 % User time : 0.035 s
% 0.16/0.45 % System time : 0.024 s
% 0.16/0.45 % Total time : 0.059 s
% 0.16/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------