%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV255-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/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 02:54:06 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 7.13s 1.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 7.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 22 ( 8 unt; 2 nHn; 15 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 0 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 7 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 11 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Nat_Oadd__leE_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat),X3,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X2,X3,tc_nat) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Nat_Oadd__leE_0) ).
cnf(cls_Nat_Oadd__leE_1,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat),X3,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X1,X3,tc_nat) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Nat_Oadd__leE_1) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_xa,X1,tc_nat)
| ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(X1),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg2,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(X1,v_xb(X1),tc_nat),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_x,X1,tc_nat)
| ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(X1),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(X1)),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(X1)),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg2,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_3) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat),X3,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X2,X3,tc_nat) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Nat_Oadd__leE_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat),X3,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X1,X3,tc_nat) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Nat_Oadd__leE_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_xa,X1,tc_nat)
| ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(X1),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg2,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat),X3,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X2,X3,tc_nat) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(X1,v_xb(X1),tc_nat),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_x,X1,tc_nat)
| ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(X1),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat),X3,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X1,X3,tc_nat) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_xa,X1,tc_nat)
| ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(X1),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg2,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(X1,v_xb(c_plus(X2,X1,tc_nat)),tc_nat),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_x,X1,tc_nat)
| ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(X1),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(X1,v_xb(c_plus(X1,X2,tc_nat)),tc_nat),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(c_plus(X1,v_xa,tc_nat))),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg2,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(X1)),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(X1)),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg2,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
cls_conjecture_3 ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(c_plus(v_x,X1,tc_nat))),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_xb(c_plus(X1,v_xa,tc_nat))),c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_msg1,c_emptyset,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWV255-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:36:18 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.42 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
% 7.13/1.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 7.13/1.47 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 7.13/1.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3040957 completed with status 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 7.13/1.47 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 7.13/1.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 7.13/1.47 % No SInE strategy applied
% 7.13/1.47 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 7.13/1.47 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 113s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_B07CMA_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 113s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with pid 3040966 completed with status 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Result found by G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI
% 7.13/1.47 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 7.13/1.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 7.13/1.47 % No SInE strategy applied
% 7.13/1.47 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 7.13/1.47 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 113s (1) cores
% 7.13/1.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.027 s
% 7.13/1.47
% 7.13/1.47 % Proof found!
% 7.13/1.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 7.13/1.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.13/1.47 % Parsed axioms : 2791
% 7.13/1.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Initial clauses : 2791
% 7.13/1.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 9
% 7.13/1.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2782
% 7.13/1.47 % Processed clauses : 6438
% 7.13/1.47 % ...of these trivial : 70
% 7.13/1.47 % ...subsumed : 3370
% 7.13/1.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 2998
% 7.13/1.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 73
% 7.13/1.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Backward-subsumed : 32
% 7.13/1.47 % Backward-rewritten : 65
% 7.13/1.47 % Generated clauses : 16673
% 7.13/1.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 13876
% 7.13/1.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 5
% 7.13/1.47 % Paramodulations : 16527
% 7.13/1.47 % Factorizations : 5
% 7.13/1.47 % NegExts : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Equation resolutions : 141
% 7.13/1.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Total rewrite steps : 8448
% 7.13/1.47 % ...of those cached : 6897
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 7.13/1.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 7.13/1.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 7.13/1.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 7.13/1.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 7.13/1.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 2901
% 7.13/1.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 652
% 7.13/1.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 9
% 7.13/1.47 % Negative unit clauses : 89
% 7.13/1.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 2151
% 7.13/1.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 10172
% 7.13/1.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 24762
% 7.13/1.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 105
% 7.13/1.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2824718
% 7.13/1.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1833638
% 7.13/1.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2980
% 7.13/1.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 119953
% 7.13/1.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 2
% 7.13/1.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 862
% 7.13/1.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 45
% 7.13/1.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 7.13/1.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 318115
% 7.13/1.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 4040
% 7.13/1.47
% 7.13/1.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 7.13/1.47 % User time : 0.916 s
% 7.13/1.47 % System time : 0.039 s
% 7.13/1.47 % Total time : 0.955 s
% 7.13/1.47 % Maximum resident set size: 8504 pages
% 7.13/1.47
% 7.13/1.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 7.13/1.47 % User time : 4.430 s
% 7.13/1.47 % System time : 0.165 s
% 7.13/1.47 % Total time : 4.595 s
% 7.13/1.47 % Maximum resident set size: 6656 pages
% 7.13/1.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------