%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV047+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n005.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 02:53:35 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 7 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 19 ( 6 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 10 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 17 ( 17 usr; 12 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn 0 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(cl5_nebula_norm_0013,conjecture,
( ( leq(pv35,minus(n5,n1))
& leq(n0,pv35)
& pv82 = sum(n0,minus(n135300,n1),times(minus(a_select2(x,pv83),a_select2(mu,pv35)),times(minus(a_select2(x,pv83),a_select2(mu,pv35)),a_select3(q,pv83,pv35))))
& pv78 = sum(n0,minus(n135300,n1),a_select3(q,pv79,pv35)) )
=> true ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cl5_nebula_norm_0013) ).
fof(ttrue,axiom,
true,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV003+0.ax',ttrue) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( leq(pv35,minus(n5,n1))
& leq(n0,pv35)
& pv82 = sum(n0,minus(n135300,n1),times(minus(a_select2(x,pv83),a_select2(mu,pv35)),times(minus(a_select2(x,pv83),a_select2(mu,pv35)),a_select3(q,pv83,pv35))))
& pv78 = sum(n0,minus(n135300,n1),a_select3(q,pv79,pv35)) )
=> true ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cl5_nebula_norm_0013]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ~ true
& leq(pv35,minus(n5,n1))
& leq(n0,pv35)
& pv82 = sum(n0,minus(n135300,n1),times(minus(a_select2(x,pv83),a_select2(mu,pv35)),times(minus(a_select2(x,pv83),a_select2(mu,pv35)),a_select3(q,pv83,pv35))))
& pv78 = sum(n0,minus(n135300,n1),a_select3(q,pv79,pv35)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ true,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
true,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ttrue]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SWV047+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.49 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.49 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.49 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.49 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.49 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.49 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.49 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.49 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:28:33 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.49 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.49 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.56 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.56 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
% 0.23/0.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % new_bool_3 with pid 3021324 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.61 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.61 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.61 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3021327 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.61 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.61 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.61 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.23/0.61
% 0.23/0.61 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.61 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.61 % Parsed axioms : 92
% 0.23/0.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 22
% 0.23/0.61 % Initial clauses : 77
% 0.23/0.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 77
% 0.23/0.61 % Processed clauses : 2
% 0.23/0.61 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 1
% 0.23/0.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.23/0.61 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 1
% 0.23/0.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/0.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 75
% 0.23/0.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 120
% 0.23/0.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3659
% 0.23/0.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 593
% 0.23/0.61
% 0.23/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.61 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.23/0.61 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.61 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.23/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3740 pages
% 0.23/0.61
% 0.23/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.61 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.23/0.61 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.23/0.61 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.23/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.23/0.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------