%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR031+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n018.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 12:18:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 1.66s 1.15s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.66s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 17 ( 11 ~; 4 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 2 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 1 sgn 6 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query181,conjecture,
~ disjointwith(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398,c_tptpcol_16_18488),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query181) ).
fof(ax3_4028,axiom,
! [X1] :
~ ( individual(X1)
& collection(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_4028) ).
fof(ax3_41385,axiom,
! [X6,X3] :
( disjointwith(X6,X3)
=> collection(X6) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_41385) ).
fof(ax3_20191,axiom,
individual(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_20191) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ disjointwith(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398,c_tptpcol_16_18488),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query181]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X65] :
( ~ individual(X65)
| ~ collection(X65) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_4028])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X40,X41] :
( collection(X40)
| ~ disjointwith(X40,X41) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_41385])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
disjointwith(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398,c_tptpcol_16_18488),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ individual(X1)
| ~ collection(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
individual(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax3_20191]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ disjointwith(X1,X2)
| collection(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
disjointwith(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398,c_tptpcol_16_18488),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
~ collection(c_tptptptpcol_16_8398),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : CSR031+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n018.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 14:29:14 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41 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
% 1.66/1.15 % Version: 3.5.1
% 1.66/1.15 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.66/1.15 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % sh5l with pid 2135995 completed with status 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Result found by sh5l
% 1.66/1.15 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.66/1.15 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 1.66/1.15 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 1.66/1.15 % Search class: FHHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 1.66/1.15 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 1.66/1.15 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2135996 completed with status 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 1.66/1.15 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.66/1.15 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 1.66/1.15 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 1.66/1.15 % Search class: FHHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 1.66/1.15 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 1.66/1.15 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.66/1.15 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 1.66/1.15 % Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% 1.66/1.15
% 1.66/1.15 % Proof found!
% 1.66/1.15 % SZS status Theorem
% 1.66/1.15 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.66/1.15 % Parsed axioms : 44217
% 1.66/1.15 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 43599
% 1.66/1.15 % Initial clauses : 618
% 1.66/1.15 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 1.66/1.15 % Initial clauses in saturation : 617
% 1.66/1.15 % Processed clauses : 605
% 1.66/1.15 % ...of these trivial : 128
% 1.66/1.15 % ...subsumed : 63
% 1.66/1.15 % ...remaining for further processing : 414
% 1.66/1.15 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 1.66/1.15 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Generated clauses : 425
% 1.66/1.15 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 329
% 1.66/1.15 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Paramodulations : 424
% 1.66/1.15 % Factorizations : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % NegExts : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 1.66/1.15 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Total rewrite steps : 168
% 1.66/1.15 % ...of those cached : 73
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional check models : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 1.66/1.15 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 1.66/1.15 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 1.66/1.15 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 1.66/1.15 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 1.66/1.15 % Current number of processed clauses : 413
% 1.66/1.15 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 237
% 1.66/1.15 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 1.66/1.15 % Non-unit-clauses : 172
% 1.66/1.15 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 341
% 1.66/1.15 % ...number of literals in the above : 525
% 1.66/1.15 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 8763
% 1.66/1.15 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8370
% 1.66/1.15 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 63
% 1.66/1.15 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 398
% 1.66/1.15 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Condensation successes : 0
% 1.66/1.15 % Termbank termtop insertions : 317260
% 1.66/1.15 % Search garbage collected termcells : 158778
% 1.66/1.15
% 1.66/1.15 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.66/1.15 % User time : 0.149 s
% 1.66/1.15 % System time : 0.085 s
% 1.66/1.15 % Total time : 0.234 s
% 1.66/1.15 % Maximum resident set size: 84276 pages
% 1.66/1.15
% 1.66/1.15 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.66/1.15 % User time : 0.567 s
% 1.66/1.15 % System time : 0.124 s
% 1.66/1.15 % Total time : 0.692 s
% 1.66/1.15 % Maximum resident set size: 37632 pages
% 1.66/1.15 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------