%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : ITP010_5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 12:55:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 2.02s 2.74s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.02s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 6 ( 3 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 13 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 14 ( 7 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 2 sgn 12 !; 0 ?; 6 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
del: $tType ).
tff(decl_23,type,
bool: del ).
tff(decl_25,type,
arr: ( del * del ) > del ).
tff(decl_26,type,
mem: ( del * $i ) > $o ).
tff(decl_27,type,
ap: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(decl_30,type,
p: $i > $o ).
tff(decl_3037,type,
c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq: ( del * del ) > $i ).
tff(conj_thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE,conjecture,
! [X11: del,X14: del,X324] :
( mem(X324,arr(X11,bool))
=> ! [X55] :
( mem(X55,arr(X14,bool))
=> ( ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X11,X14),X324),X55))
<=> ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X11,X14),X324),X55)) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE) ).
tff(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X11: del,X14: del,X324] :
( mem(X324,arr(X11,bool))
=> ! [X55] :
( mem(X55,arr(X14,bool))
=> ( ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X11,X14),X324),X55))
<=> ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X11,X14),X324),X55)) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE]) ).
tff(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X11: del,X14: del,X324] :
( mem(X324,arr(X11,bool))
=> ! [X55] : $true ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ $true,
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : ITP010_5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.34 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.34 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.34 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 21:45:05 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.34 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.39 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
% 2.02/2.74 % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.02/2.74 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.02/2.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 299s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with pid 2390602 completed with status 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y
% 2.02/2.74 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.02/2.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 299s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.02/2.74 % SinE strategy is gf120_gu_R02_F100_L20000
% 2.02/2.74 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLS33-DFFFFFNN
% 2.02/2.74 % partial match(1): FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 2.02/2.74 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 299 seconds (299 total)
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2390607 completed with status 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 2.02/2.74 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.02/2.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 299s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.02/2.74 % SinE strategy is gf120_gu_R02_F100_L20000
% 2.02/2.74 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLS33-DFFFFFNN
% 2.02/2.74 % partial match(1): FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 2.02/2.74 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 299 seconds (299 total)
% 2.02/2.74 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 2.02/2.74 % Preprocessing time : 0.057 s
% 2.02/2.74
% 2.02/2.74 % Proof found!
% 2.02/2.74 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.02/2.74 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.02/2.74 % Parsed axioms : 11903
% 2.02/2.74 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 11587
% 2.02/2.74 % Initial clauses : 1179
% 2.02/2.74 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 32
% 2.02/2.74 % Initial clauses in saturation : 1147
% 2.02/2.74 % Processed clauses : 1
% 2.02/2.74 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % ...subsumed : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % ...remaining for further processing : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Generated clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Paramodulations : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Factorizations : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % NegExts : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % ...of those cached : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional check models : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 2.02/2.74 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 2.02/2.74 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 2.02/2.74 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 2.02/2.74 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 2.02/2.74 % Current number of processed clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1146
% 2.02/2.74 % ...number of literals in the above : 5913
% 2.02/2.74 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Condensation successes : 0
% 2.02/2.74 % Termbank termtop insertions : 521962
% 2.02/2.74 % Search garbage collected termcells : 247128
% 2.02/2.74
% 2.02/2.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.02/2.74 % User time : 0.317 s
% 2.02/2.74 % System time : 0.103 s
% 2.02/2.74 % Total time : 0.420 s
% 2.02/2.74 % Maximum resident set size: 48980 pages
% 2.02/2.74
% 2.02/2.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.02/2.74 % User time : 2.142 s
% 2.02/2.74 % System time : 0.173 s
% 2.02/2.74 % Total time : 2.315 s
% 2.02/2.74 % Maximum resident set size: 43008 pages
% 2.02/2.74 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------