%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV578-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 02:59:35 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 4.70s 6.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.70s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 14 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 9 RR)
% Number of literals : 20 ( 9 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 6 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(t_a),hAPP(v_f,v_m)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OgreaterThanLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a)) != c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_atLeastSucLessThan__greaterThanLessThan_0,axiom,
c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(hAPP(c_Suc,X1),X2,tc_nat) = c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OgreaterThanLessThan(X1,X2,tc_nat),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_atLeastSucLessThan__greaterThanLessThan_0) ).
cnf(cls_setsum__head__upt__Suc_0,axiom,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X3,tc_nat),X4))
| ~ class_OrderedGroup_Ocomm__monoid__add(X1)
| c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(X2,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(X3,X4,tc_nat),tc_nat,X1) = hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1),hAPP(X2,X3)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(X2,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(hAPP(c_Suc,X3),X4,tc_nat),tc_nat,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_setsum__head__upt__Suc_0) ).
cnf(tfree_tcs,negated_conjecture,
class_OrderedGroup_Ocomm__monoid__add(t_a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',tfree_tcs) ).
cnf(cls_less_0,axiom,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(v_m,tc_nat),v_n)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_less_0) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(t_a),hAPP(v_f,v_m)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OgreaterThanLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a)) != c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(t_a),hAPP(v_f,v_m)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OgreaterThanLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a)) != c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(hAPP(c_Suc,X1),X2,tc_nat) = c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OgreaterThanLessThan(X1,X2,tc_nat),
cls_atLeastSucLessThan__greaterThanLessThan_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X3,tc_nat),X4))
| ~ class_OrderedGroup_Ocomm__monoid__add(X1)
| c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(X2,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(X3,X4,tc_nat),tc_nat,X1) = hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1),hAPP(X2,X3)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(X2,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(hAPP(c_Suc,X3),X4,tc_nat),tc_nat,X1)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_setsum__head__upt__Suc_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(t_a),hAPP(v_f,v_m)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(hAPP(c_Suc,v_m),v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a)) != c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(v_f,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),tc_nat,t_a),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X3,tc_nat),X4))
| ~ class_OrderedGroup_Ocomm__monoid__add(X1)
| c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(X2,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(X3,X4,tc_nat),tc_nat,X1) = hAPP(hAPP(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1),hAPP(X2,X3)),c_Finite__Set_Osetsum(X2,c_SetInterval_Oord__class_OatLeastLessThan(hAPP(c_Suc,X3),X4,tc_nat),tc_nat,X1)) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
class_OrderedGroup_Ocomm__monoid__add(t_a),
tfree_tcs ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(v_m,tc_nat),v_n)),
cls_less_0 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV578-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/5.65 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.18/5.65 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/5.65 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/5.65 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/5.65 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/5.65 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/5.65 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/5.65 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:12:23 UTC 2026
% 0.18/5.66 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/5.66 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/5.72 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/5.72 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
% 4.70/6.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 4.70/6.56 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 4.70/6.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % new_bool_1 with pid 2564096 completed with status 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 4.70/6.56 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 4.70/6.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 4.70/6.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 4.70/6.56 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 4.70/6.56 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2564098 completed with status 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 4.70/6.56 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 4.70/6.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 4.70/6.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 4.70/6.56 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 4.70/6.56 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 4.70/6.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 4.70/6.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 4.70/6.56
% 4.70/6.56 % Proof found!
% 4.70/6.56 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 4.70/6.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 4.70/6.56 % Parsed axioms : 1225
% 4.70/6.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 582
% 4.70/6.56 % Initial clauses : 643
% 4.70/6.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 643
% 4.70/6.56 % Processed clauses : 3542
% 4.70/6.56 % ...of these trivial : 253
% 4.70/6.56 % ...subsumed : 2419
% 4.70/6.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 870
% 4.70/6.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 39
% 4.70/6.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Backward-subsumed : 8
% 4.70/6.56 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 4.70/6.56 % Generated clauses : 19740
% 4.70/6.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 16119
% 4.70/6.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Paramodulations : 19688
% 4.70/6.56 % Factorizations : 8
% 4.70/6.56 % NegExts : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Equation resolutions : 44
% 4.70/6.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Total rewrite steps : 13342
% 4.70/6.56 % ...of those cached : 12546
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 4.70/6.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 4.70/6.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 4.70/6.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 4.70/6.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 4.70/6.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 858
% 4.70/6.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 187
% 4.70/6.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 13
% 4.70/6.56 % Negative unit clauses : 98
% 4.70/6.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 560
% 4.70/6.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 13212
% 4.70/6.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 45785
% 4.70/6.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 12
% 4.70/6.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 76958
% 4.70/6.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 28876
% 4.70/6.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1030
% 4.70/6.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2443
% 4.70/6.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3558
% 4.70/6.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 54
% 4.70/6.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 4.70/6.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 416583
% 4.70/6.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 3600
% 4.70/6.56
% 4.70/6.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 4.70/6.56 % User time : 0.657 s
% 4.70/6.56 % System time : 0.030 s
% 4.70/6.56 % Total time : 0.687 s
% 4.70/6.56 % Maximum resident set size: 5344 pages
% 4.70/6.56
% 4.70/6.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 4.70/6.56 % User time : 0.730 s
% 4.70/6.56 % System time : 0.040 s
% 4.70/6.56 % Total time : 0.770 s
% 4.70/6.56 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 4.70/6.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------