%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SCT162+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 02:07:59 PM UTC 2026
% Result : ContradictoryAxioms 11.61s 2.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 11.61s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 17 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 17 ( 16 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 6 ( 6 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 1 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 71 ( 26 sgn 31 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(fact_n__not__Suc__n,axiom,
! [X13] : X13 != hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X13),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_n__not__Suc__n) ).
fof(help_c__COMBB__1,axiom,
! [X12,X70,X24,X40,X5,X28] : hAPP(hAPP(c_COMBB(X28,X5,X40,X24),X70),X12) = hAPP(X24,hAPP(X70,X12)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',help_c__COMBB__1) ).
fof(help_c__COMBS__1,axiom,
! [X12,X70,X24,X5,X40,X28] : hAPP(c_COMBS(X28,X40,X5,X24,X70),X12) = hAPP(hAPP(X24,X12),hAPP(X70,X12)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',help_c__COMBS__1) ).
fof(help_c__COMBI__1,axiom,
! [X87,X5] : hAPP(c_COMBI(X5),X87) = X87,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',help_c__COMBI__1) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X13] : X13 != hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X13),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_n__not__Suc__n]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X1678,X1679,X1680,X1681,X1682,X1683] : hAPP(hAPP(c_COMBB(X1683,X1682,X1681,X1680),X1679),X1678) = hAPP(X1680,hAPP(X1679,X1678)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[help_c__COMBB__1]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X1690,X1691,X1692,X1693,X1694,X1695] : hAPP(c_COMBS(X1695,X1694,X1693,X1692,X1691),X1690) = hAPP(hAPP(X1692,X1690),hAPP(X1691,X1690)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[help_c__COMBS__1]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X1262] : X1262 != hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X1262),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
hAPP(hAPP(c_COMBB(X1,X2,X3,X4),X5),X6) = hAPP(X4,hAPP(X5,X6)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
hAPP(c_COMBS(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5),X6) = hAPP(hAPP(X4,X6),hAPP(X5,X6)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
X1 != hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
hAPP(c_COMBS(X1,X2,X3,c_COMBB(X4,X5,X6,X7),X8),X9) = hAPP(X7,hAPP(X9,hAPP(X8,X9))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X1672,X1673] : hAPP(c_COMBI(X1673),X1672) = X1672,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[help_c__COMBI__1]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
hAPP(c_COMBS(X1,X2,X3,c_COMBB(X4,X5,X6,c_Nat_OSuc),X7),X8) != hAPP(X8,hAPP(X7,X8)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
hAPP(c_COMBI(X1),X2) = X2,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
hAPP(c_COMBS(X1,X2,X3,c_COMBB(X4,X5,X6,c_Nat_OSuc),c_COMBI(X7)),X8) != hAPP(X8,X8),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
$false,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SCT162+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.42 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.42 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.16/0.42 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.16/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:36:17 UTC 2026
% 0.16/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.50 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
% 11.61/2.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 11.61/2.56 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 11.61/2.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 2009362 completed with status 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 11.61/2.56 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 11.61/2.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 11.61/2.56 % No SInE strategy applied
% 11.61/2.56 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 11.61/2.56 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 113s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 113s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2009373 completed with status 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Result found by U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 11.61/2.56 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 11.61/2.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 11.61/2.56 % No SInE strategy applied
% 11.61/2.56 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 11.61/2.56 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 113s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Starting U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 113s (1) cores
% 11.61/2.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.021 s
% 11.61/2.56 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 11.61/2.56
% 11.61/2.56 % Proof found!
% 11.61/2.56 % SZS status ContradictoryAxioms
% 11.61/2.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 11.61/2.56 % Parsed axioms : 532
% 11.61/2.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Initial clauses : 788
% 11.61/2.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 50
% 11.61/2.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 738
% 11.61/2.56 % Processed clauses : 3667
% 11.61/2.56 % ...of these trivial : 37
% 11.61/2.56 % ...subsumed : 1734
% 11.61/2.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 1896
% 11.61/2.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 636
% 11.61/2.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Backward-subsumed : 53
% 11.61/2.56 % Backward-rewritten : 25
% 11.61/2.56 % Generated clauses : 30571
% 11.61/2.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 29084
% 11.61/2.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 11.61/2.56 % Paramodulations : 29915
% 11.61/2.56 % Factorizations : 4
% 11.61/2.56 % NegExts : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Equation resolutions : 664
% 11.61/2.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Total rewrite steps : 5055
% 11.61/2.56 % ...of those cached : 4172
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 11.61/2.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 11.61/2.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 11.61/2.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 11.61/2.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 11.61/2.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 1184
% 11.61/2.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 152
% 11.61/2.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 24
% 11.61/2.56 % Negative unit clauses : 247
% 11.61/2.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 761
% 11.61/2.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 26653
% 11.61/2.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 68787
% 11.61/2.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 617
% 11.61/2.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 197851
% 11.61/2.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 57326
% 11.61/2.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 640
% 11.61/2.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14553
% 11.61/2.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 8152
% 11.61/2.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 2677
% 11.61/2.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 11.61/2.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 908805
% 11.61/2.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 11508
% 11.61/2.56
% 11.61/2.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 11.61/2.56 % User time : 1.877 s
% 11.61/2.56 % System time : 0.070 s
% 11.61/2.56 % Total time : 1.947 s
% 11.61/2.56 % Maximum resident set size: 7200 pages
% 11.61/2.56
% 11.61/2.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 11.61/2.56 % User time : 9.091 s
% 11.61/2.56 % System time : 0.308 s
% 11.61/2.56 % Total time : 9.399 s
% 11.61/2.56 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 11.61/2.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------