%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV413+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 : n011.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 02:54:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.58s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 31 ( 11 ~; 7 |; 10 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 25 ( 0 sgn 17 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l49_co,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( less_than(X4,X3)
& strictly_less_than(X2,X4)
& pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
=> ? [X5] :
( less_than(X4,X5)
& pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X5) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l49_co) ).
fof(l49_li3637,lemma,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( less_than(X4,X3)
& pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
=> pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l49_li3637) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( less_than(X4,X3)
& strictly_less_than(X2,X4)
& pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
=> ? [X5] :
( less_than(X4,X5)
& pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X5) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l49_co]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X10] :
( ( ~ less_than(esk4_0,X10)
| ~ pair_in_list(update_slb(esk1_0,esk4_0),esk2_0,X10) )
& less_than(esk4_0,esk3_0)
& strictly_less_than(esk2_0,esk4_0)
& pair_in_list(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
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_2])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,lemma,
! [X24,X25,X26,X27] :
( pair_in_list(update_slb(X24,X27),X25,X26)
| ~ less_than(X27,X26)
| ~ pair_in_list(X24,X25,X26) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l49_li3637])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ less_than(esk4_0,X1)
| ~ pair_in_list(update_slb(esk1_0,esk4_0),esk2_0,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,lemma,
( ~ less_than(X4,X3)
| ~ pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3)
| pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ less_than(esk4_0,X1)
| ~ pair_in_list(esk1_0,esk2_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
pair_in_list(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
less_than(esk4_0,esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SWV413+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.43 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.44 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:45:25 UTC 2026
% 0.15/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.52 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
% 0.24/0.58 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % new_bool_3 with pid 1504197 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.58 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.58 % Search class: FGHSS-FFMS22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.58 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.58 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1504201 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.58 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.58 % Search class: FGHSS-FFMS22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.58 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.58 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.58 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.58
% 0.24/0.58 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.58 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.58 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.58 % Parsed axioms : 20
% 0.24/0.58 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 7
% 0.24/0.58 % Initial clauses : 23
% 0.24/0.58 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Initial clauses in saturation : 23
% 0.24/0.58 % Processed clauses : 89
% 0.24/0.58 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % ...subsumed : 45
% 0.24/0.58 % ...remaining for further processing : 44
% 0.24/0.58 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% 0.24/0.58 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Generated clauses : 246
% 0.24/0.58 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 175
% 0.24/0.58 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.24/0.58 % Paramodulations : 228
% 0.24/0.58 % Factorizations : 16
% 0.24/0.58 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Equation resolutions : 3
% 0.24/0.58 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Total rewrite steps : 70
% 0.24/0.58 % ...of those cached : 58
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.58 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.58 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.58 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.58 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.58 % Current number of processed clauses : 42
% 0.24/0.58 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.24/0.58 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.24/0.58 % Non-unit-clauses : 31
% 0.24/0.58 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 109
% 0.24/0.58 % ...number of literals in the above : 411
% 0.24/0.58 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 691
% 0.24/0.58 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 556
% 0.24/0.58 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 46
% 0.24/0.58 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.24/0.58 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.24/0.58 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.58 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3831
% 0.24/0.58 % Search garbage collected termcells : 324
% 0.24/0.58
% 0.24/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.58 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.24/0.58 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.58 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.24/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 3604 pages
% 0.24/0.58
% 0.24/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.58 % User time : 0.019 s
% 0.24/0.58 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.58 % Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.24/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/0.58 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------