%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV006-1 : 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 : n018.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 0.08s 0.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.08s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 16 RR)
% Number of literals : 31 ( 0 equ; 17 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(clause_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ less_than(a(X1),a(m))
| ~ less_than(X1,successor(n))
| less_than(X1,i) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_6) ).
cnf(x_not_less_than_x,axiom,
~ less_than(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV001-0.ax',x_not_less_than_x) ).
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_5,negated_conjecture,
less_than(a(i),a(m)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_5) ).
cnf(less_than_successor,axiom,
less_than(X1,successor(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV001-0.ax',less_than_successor) ).
cnf(clause_3,negated_conjecture,
less_than(i,n),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_3) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ less_than(a(X1),a(m))
| ~ less_than(X1,successor(n))
| less_than(X1,i) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
~ less_than(X1,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[x_not_less_than_x]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,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_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ less_than(a(X1),a(m))
| ~ less_than(X1,successor(n))
| less_than(X1,i) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
less_than(a(i),a(m)),
clause_5 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
~ less_than(X1,X1),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ less_than(X3,X2)
| ~ less_than(X1,X3)
| less_than(X1,X2) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
less_than(X1,successor(X1)),
less_than_successor ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ less_than(i,successor(n)),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ less_than(X1,X2)
| less_than(X1,successor(X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
less_than(i,n),
clause_3 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV006-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:28:29 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.39 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
% 0.08/0.41 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.08/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % sh5l with pid 1448829 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.08/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.08/0.41 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.08/0.41 % Search class: FGHSM-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1448832 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.08/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.08/0.41 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.08/0.41 % Search class: FGHSM-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.08/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.41 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.08/0.41
% 0.08/0.41 % Proof found!
% 0.08/0.41 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.08/0.41 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.08/0.41 % Parsed axioms : 20
% 0.08/0.41 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Initial clauses : 20
% 0.08/0.41 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.08/0.41 % Initial clauses in saturation : 18
% 0.08/0.41 % Processed clauses : 77
% 0.08/0.41 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % ...subsumed : 25
% 0.08/0.41 % ...remaining for further processing : 52
% 0.08/0.41 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.08/0.41 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Generated clauses : 152
% 0.08/0.41 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 105
% 0.08/0.41 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Paramodulations : 144
% 0.08/0.41 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.08/0.41 % NegExts : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.08/0.41 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Total rewrite steps : 28
% 0.08/0.41 % ...of those cached : 14
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.41 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.41 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.41 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.41 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.41 % Current number of processed clauses : 52
% 0.08/0.41 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 14
% 0.08/0.41 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Negative unit clauses : 23
% 0.08/0.41 % Non-unit-clauses : 15
% 0.08/0.41 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 46
% 0.08/0.41 % ...number of literals in the above : 113
% 0.08/0.41 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 57
% 0.08/0.41 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 43
% 0.08/0.41 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 0.08/0.41 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.08/0.41 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.08/0.41 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1536
% 0.08/0.41 % Search garbage collected termcells : 48
% 0.08/0.41
% 0.08/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.41 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.08/0.41 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.08/0.41 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.08/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 3592 pages
% 0.08/0.41
% 0.08/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.41 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.08/0.41 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.08/0.41 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.08/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.08/0.41 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------