%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : ROB022-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 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 02:06:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 7.48s 1.71s
% Output : CNFRefutation 7.48s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 13
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 31 ( 31 unt; 0 nHn; 11 RR)
% Number of literals : 31 ( 30 equ; 4 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 9 ( 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 : 38 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(robbins_axiom,axiom,
negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,negate(X2))))) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/ROB001-0.ax',robbins_axiom) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_add,axiom,
add(X1,X2) = add(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/ROB001-0.ax',commutativity_of_add) ).
cnf(condition,hypothesis,
add(c,negate(c)) = c,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',condition) ).
cnf(associativity_of_add,axiom,
add(add(X1,X2),X3) = add(X1,add(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/ROB001-0.ax',associativity_of_add) ).
cnf(prove_huntingtons_axiom,negated_conjecture,
add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_huntingtons_axiom) ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,negate(X2))))) = X1,
robbins_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
add(X1,X2) = add(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_add ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
add(c,negate(c)) = c,
condition ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X2,negate(X1))))) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
negate(add(negate(c),negate(add(c,c)))) = c,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_7]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
add(add(X1,X2),X3) = add(X1,add(X2,X3)),
associativity_of_add ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
negate(add(c,negate(add(c,c)))) = negate(c),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]),c_0_7]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
negate(add(c,c)) = negate(c),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_11]),c_0_6]),c_0_9]),c_0_6]),c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(negate(X2),X1)))) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
negate(add(negate(c),negate(c))) = c,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_12]),c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
negate(add(negate(add(c,X1)),negate(add(X1,add(negate(c),negate(c)))))) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
add(X1,add(X2,X3)) = add(X3,add(X1,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
negate(add(negate(add(X1,add(X2,X3))),negate(add(X2,add(X3,negate(X1)))))) = add(X2,X3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
add(c,add(negate(c),X1)) = add(c,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
negate(add(negate(add(c,X1)),negate(add(negate(c),add(X1,negate(c)))))) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,add(negate(add(X2,X3)),negate(add(X2,negate(X3)))))))) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
add(negate(c),X1) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
negate(add(X1,negate(X1))) = negate(c),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_huntingtons_axiom]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
negate(add(X1,negate(add(X1,add(X2,negate(add(X1,negate(X2)))))))) = negate(add(X1,negate(X2))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_5]),c_0_6]),c_0_10]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
negate(negate(add(X1,negate(negate(X1))))) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_22]),c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
c_0_23 ).
cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
negate(negate(X1)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(b),negate(a)))) != b,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X2,negate(X1)))) = negate(X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]),c_0_27])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : ROB022-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.64 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.64 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.64 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.64 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.64 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.64 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.64 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:23:57 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.65 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.65 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.72 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.72 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
% 7.48/1.71 % Version: 3.5.1
% 7.48/1.71 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 7.48/1.71 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 838049 completed with status 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 7.48/1.71 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 7.48/1.71 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 7.48/1.71 % No SInE strategy applied
% 7.48/1.71 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 7.48/1.71 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting U----_206c_00_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting U----_206d_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % SubtermCWHack with pid 838053 completed with status 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 7.48/1.71 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 7.48/1.71 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 7.48/1.71 % No SInE strategy applied
% 7.48/1.71 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 7.48/1.71 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 7.48/1.71 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 7.48/1.71 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 7.48/1.71
% 7.48/1.71 % Proof found!
% 7.48/1.71 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 7.48/1.71 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.48/1.71 % Parsed axioms : 5
% 7.48/1.71 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Initial clauses : 5
% 7.48/1.71 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 7.48/1.71 % Processed clauses : 2359
% 7.48/1.71 % ...of these trivial : 1468
% 7.48/1.71 % ...subsumed : 662
% 7.48/1.71 % ...remaining for further processing : 229
% 7.48/1.71 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Backward-rewritten : 103
% 7.48/1.71 % Generated clauses : 51150
% 7.48/1.71 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 39491
% 7.48/1.71 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Paramodulations : 51150
% 7.48/1.71 % Factorizations : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % NegExts : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Total rewrite steps : 112745
% 7.48/1.71 % ...of those cached : 96882
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional check models : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 7.48/1.71 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 7.48/1.71 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 7.48/1.71 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 7.48/1.71 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 7.48/1.71 % Current number of processed clauses : 126
% 7.48/1.71 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 122
% 7.48/1.71 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 7.48/1.71 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 36587
% 7.48/1.71 % ...number of literals in the above : 36587
% 7.48/1.71 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Current number of archived clauses : 103
% 7.48/1.71 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 7.48/1.71 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % BW rewrite match attempts : 7029
% 7.48/1.71 % BW rewrite match successes : 121
% 7.48/1.71 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Condensation successes : 0
% 7.48/1.71 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1251107
% 7.48/1.71 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 7.48/1.71
% 7.48/1.71 % -------------------------------------------------
% 7.48/1.71 % User time : 0.799 s
% 7.48/1.71 % System time : 0.046 s
% 7.48/1.71 % Total time : 0.845 s
% 7.48/1.71 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 7.48/1.71
% 7.48/1.71 % -------------------------------------------------
% 7.48/1.71 % User time : 4.223 s
% 7.48/1.71 % System time : 0.253 s
% 7.48/1.71 % Total time : 4.476 s
% 7.48/1.71 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 7.48/1.71 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------