%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : RNG124+4 : 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 : n026.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 02:05:57 PM UTC 2026
% Result : ContradictoryAxioms 0.16s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 60 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 13 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 64 ( 19 ~; 12 |; 31 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 15 ( 15 usr; 11 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 0 sgn 5 !; 10 ?)
% 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)
| ? [X2,X3] :
( sdtpldt0(X2,X3) = X1
& aElementOf0(X3,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(xa)) ) ) )
=> ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X1),sbrdtbr0(xu)) )
& xu != sz00
& aElementOf0(xu,xI)
& ? [X1,X2] :
( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = xu
& aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(X1,slsdtgt0(xa)) ) ),
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)
& ? [X1,X2] :
( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = xr
& aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(X1,slsdtgt0(xa)) ) ),
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)
| ? [X2,X3] :
( sdtpldt0(X2,X3) = X1
& aElementOf0(X3,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(xa)) ) ) )
=> ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X1),sbrdtbr0(xu)) )
& xu != sz00
& aElementOf0(xu,xI)
& ? [X1,X2] :
( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = xu
& aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(X1,slsdtgt0(xa)) ) ),
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,
! [X45,X46,X47] :
( ( ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X45),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| X45 = sz00
| ~ aElementOf0(X45,xI) )
& ( ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X45),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| X45 = sz00
| sdtpldt0(X46,X47) != X45
| ~ aElementOf0(X47,slsdtgt0(xb))
| ~ aElementOf0(X46,slsdtgt0(xa)) )
& xu != sz00
& aElementOf0(xu,xI)
& sdtpldt0(esk17_0,esk18_0) = xu
& aElementOf0(esk18_0,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(esk17_0,slsdtgt0(xa)) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[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]) ).
fof(c_0_10,hypothesis,
( aElementOf0(xr,xI)
& sdtpldt0(esk26_0,esk27_0) = xr
& aElementOf0(esk27_0,slsdtgt0(xb))
& aElementOf0(esk26_0,slsdtgt0(xa)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[m__2729])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
( ~ iLess0(sbrdtbr0(X1),sbrdtbr0(xu))
| ~ aElementOf0(X1,xI)
| X1 = sz00 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
iLess0(sbrdtbr0(xr),sbrdtbr0(xu)),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xr,xI),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),c_0_9]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : RNG124+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.38 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:24:38 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.16/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % new_bool_1 with pid 1358380 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.16/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.46 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1358385 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.46 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/0.46
% 0.16/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.46 % SZS status ContradictoryAxioms
% 0.16/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 56
% 0.16/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 5
% 0.16/0.46 % Initial clauses : 197
% 0.16/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.16/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 192
% 0.16/0.46 % Processed clauses : 292
% 0.16/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 7
% 0.16/0.46 % ...subsumed : 74
% 0.16/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 211
% 0.16/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 10
% 0.16/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 6
% 0.16/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 23
% 0.16/0.46 % Generated clauses : 344
% 0.16/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 204
% 0.16/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.16/0.46 % Paramodulations : 334
% 0.16/0.46 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 10
% 0.16/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 438
% 0.16/0.46 % ...of those cached : 384
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 176
% 0.16/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 84
% 0.16/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 10
% 0.16/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 82
% 0.16/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 100
% 0.16/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 423
% 0.16/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 29
% 0.16/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1287
% 0.16/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1178
% 0.16/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 69
% 0.16/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 179
% 0.16/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 19
% 0.16/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 19
% 0.16/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 14377
% 0.16/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2381
% 0.16/0.47
% 0.16/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.47 % User time : 0.021 s
% 0.16/0.47 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3980 pages
% 0.16/0.47
% 0.16/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.47 % User time : 0.027 s
% 0.16/0.47 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Total time : 0.031 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------