%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV003-1 : 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 : 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 02:53:28 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 21 ( 11 unt; 3 nHn; 19 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 4 equ; 18 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(transitivity_of_less_than,axiom,
( ~ less_than(X3,X2)
| ~ less_than(X1,X3)
| less_than(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV001-0.ax',transitivity_of_less_than) ).
cnf(clause_3,negated_conjecture,
~ less_than(k,i),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_3) ).
cnf(anti_symmetry_of_less_than,axiom,
( ~ less_than(X2,X1)
| ~ less_than(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV001-0.ax',anti_symmetry_of_less_than) ).
cnf(clause_2,negated_conjecture,
less_than(k,j),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_2) ).
cnf(all_related,axiom,
( X1 = X2
| less_than(X2,X1)
| less_than(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV001-0.ax',all_related) ).
cnf(clause_9,negated_conjecture,
less_than(j,i),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_9) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ less_than(X3,X2)
| ~ less_than(X1,X3)
| less_than(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transitivity_of_less_than]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ less_than(k,i),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ less_than(X2,X1)
| ~ less_than(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[anti_symmetry_of_less_than]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ less_than(X3,X2)
| ~ less_than(X1,X3)
| less_than(X1,X2) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
less_than(k,j),
clause_2 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ less_than(k,i),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
( X1 = X2
| less_than(X2,X1)
| less_than(X1,X2) ),
all_related ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ less_than(X2,X1)
| ~ less_than(X1,X2) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
less_than(j,i),
clause_9 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ less_than(X1,k)
| less_than(X1,j) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( less_than(i,k)
| k = i ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ less_than(i,j),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ less_than(j,k),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
k = i,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n026.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 08:29:07 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 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
% 0.11/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % new_bool_3 with pid 1839634 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.44 % Search class: FGHSM-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1839640 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.44 % Search class: FGHSM-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.44
% 0.11/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.44 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 21
% 0.11/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Initial clauses : 21
% 0.11/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.11/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 19
% 0.11/0.44 % Processed clauses : 36
% 0.11/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % ...subsumed : 7
% 0.11/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 29
% 0.11/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.11/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.11/0.44 % Generated clauses : 62
% 0.11/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 37
% 0.11/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Paramodulations : 54
% 0.11/0.44 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.11/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.11/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 18
% 0.11/0.44 % ...of those cached : 10
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 24
% 0.11/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.11/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.11/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 8
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
% 0.11/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 53
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.11/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9
% 0.11/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.11/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.11/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 0.11/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.11/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.11/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 801
% 0.11/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 48
% 0.11/0.44
% 0.11/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.44 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.44 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3592 pages
% 0.11/0.44
% 0.11/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.44 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.11/0.44 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.11/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.11/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------