%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV189+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n017.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 02:53:55 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 26 ( 13 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 62 ( 12 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 8 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 56 ( 20 ~; 12 |; 13 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 10 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 8 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn 20 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(leq_succ,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( leq(X1,X2)
=> leq(X1,succ(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV003+0.ax',leq_succ) ).
fof(cl5_nebula_init_0121,conjecture,
( ! [X14] :
( ( leq(X14,n4)
& leq(n0,X14) )
=> a_select3(center_init,X14,n0) = init )
=> ! [X18] :
( ( leq(X18,tptp_minus_1)
& leq(n0,X18) )
=> ! [X4] :
( ( leq(X4,n4)
& leq(n0,X4) )
=> a_select3(q_init,X18,X4) = init ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cl5_nebula_init_0121) ).
fof(irreflexivity_gt,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ gt(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV003+0.ax',irreflexivity_gt) ).
fof(succ_tptp_minus_1,axiom,
succ(tptp_minus_1) = n0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV003+0.ax',succ_tptp_minus_1) ).
fof(leq_succ_gt_equiv,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( leq(X1,X2)
<=> gt(succ(X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV003+0.ax',leq_succ_gt_equiv) ).
fof(finite_domain_0,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( leq(X1,n0)
& leq(n0,X1) )
=> X1 = n0 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',finite_domain_0) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X39,X40] :
( leq(X39,succ(X40))
| ~ leq(X39,X40) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[leq_succ])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X14] :
( ( leq(X14,n4)
& leq(n0,X14) )
=> a_select3(center_init,X14,n0) = init )
=> ! [X18] :
( ( leq(X18,tptp_minus_1)
& leq(n0,X18) )
=> ! [X4] :
( ( leq(X4,n4)
& leq(n0,X4) )
=> a_select3(q_init,X18,X4) = init ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cl5_nebula_init_0121]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X1] : ~ gt(X1,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[irreflexivity_gt]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ leq(X1,X2)
| leq(X1,succ(X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
succ(tptp_minus_1) = n0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[succ_tptp_minus_1]) ).
fof(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
! [X28] :
( a_select3(q_init,esk1_0,esk2_0) != init
& leq(esk2_0,n4)
& leq(n0,esk2_0)
& leq(esk1_0,tptp_minus_1)
& leq(n0,esk1_0)
& ( a_select3(center_init,X28,n0) = init
| ~ leq(X28,n4)
| ~ leq(n0,X28) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X57] : ~ gt(X57,X57),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X41,X42] :
( ( leq(X41,X42)
| ~ gt(succ(X42),X41) )
& ( gt(succ(X42),X41)
| ~ leq(X41,X42) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[leq_succ_gt_equiv])])]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X47] :
( X47 = n0
| ~ leq(X47,n0)
| ~ leq(n0,X47) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[finite_domain_0])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ leq(X1,tptp_minus_1)
| leq(X1,n0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
leq(esk1_0,tptp_minus_1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
~ gt(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ leq(X1,X2)
| gt(succ(X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ leq(X1,n0)
| ~ leq(n0,X1)
| X1 = n0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
leq(esk1_0,n0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
leq(n0,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
~ leq(succ(X1),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = n0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
~ leq(n0,tptp_minus_1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_23]),c_0_24]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWV189+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:29:42 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.41 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.13/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % new_bool_3 with pid 1902332 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.43 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1902335 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.43 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.43
% 0.13/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 85
% 0.13/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 29
% 0.13/0.43 % Initial clauses : 63
% 0.13/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 63
% 0.13/0.43 % Processed clauses : 111
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % ...subsumed : 12
% 0.13/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 99
% 0.13/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.13/0.43 % Generated clauses : 100
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 76
% 0.13/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Paramodulations : 98
% 0.13/0.43 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.13/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 59
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of those cached : 38
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 95
% 0.13/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 59
% 0.13/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 22
% 0.13/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 14
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 27
% 0.13/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 73
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5
% 0.13/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.13/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 92
% 0.13/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.13/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.13/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4144
% 0.13/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 665
% 0.13/0.43
% 0.13/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.43 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.43 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3736 pages
% 0.13/0.43
% 0.13/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.43 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.13/0.43 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------