%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV395+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n001.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 02:54:38 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.28s 0.54s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.28s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 18 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 6 ~; 0 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 2 sgn 14 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l31_co,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( ok(remove_cpq(triple(X1,create_slb,X2),X3))
& strictly_less_than(X3,X4)
& pair_in_list(create_slb,X3,X4) )
=> pair_in_list(remove_slb(create_slb,X3),X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l31_co) ).
fof(ax22,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : ~ pair_in_list(create_slb,X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+2.ax',ax22) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( ok(remove_cpq(triple(X1,create_slb,X2),X3))
& strictly_less_than(X3,X4)
& pair_in_list(create_slb,X3,X4) )
=> pair_in_list(remove_slb(create_slb,X3),X3,X4) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l31_co]) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X1,X2] : ~ pair_in_list(create_slb,X1,X2),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ax22]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ~ pair_in_list(remove_slb(create_slb,esk3_0),esk3_0,esk4_0)
& ok(remove_cpq(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0),esk3_0))
& strictly_less_than(esk3_0,esk4_0)
& pair_in_list(create_slb,esk3_0,esk4_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X10,X11] : ~ pair_in_list(create_slb,X10,X11),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
pair_in_list(create_slb,esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
~ pair_in_list(create_slb,X1,X2),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SWV395+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.43 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:50:14 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.50 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
% 0.28/0.54 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.28/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % new_bool_3 with pid 2729386 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.28/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.28/0.54 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.28/0.54 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.54 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2729389 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.28/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.28/0.54 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.28/0.54 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.54 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.54 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.28/0.54
% 0.28/0.54 % Proof found!
% 0.28/0.54 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.28/0.54 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.28/0.54 % Parsed axioms : 42
% 0.28/0.54 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 14
% 0.28/0.54 % Initial clauses : 39
% 0.28/0.54 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.28/0.54 % Initial clauses in saturation : 38
% 0.28/0.54 % Processed clauses : 6
% 0.28/0.54 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % ...remaining for further processing : 6
% 0.28/0.54 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Generated clauses : 1
% 0.28/0.54 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % NegExts : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.54 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.54 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.54 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.54 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.54 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.28/0.54 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.28/0.54 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.28/0.54 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 32
% 0.28/0.54 % ...number of literals in the above : 69
% 0.28/0.54 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.28/0.54 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.28/0.54 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2683
% 0.28/0.54 % Search garbage collected termcells : 558
% 0.28/0.54
% 0.28/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.54 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.28/0.54 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.28/0.54 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.28/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 3688 pages
% 0.28/0.54
% 0.28/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.54 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.28/0.54 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.28/0.54 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.28/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.28/0.54 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------