%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT271-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n016.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 01:04:37 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 7.76s 1.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 7.76s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 12 RR)
% Number of literals : 19 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 6 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Tarski_O_91_124_AS1_A_60_61_Ainterval_Ar_Aa1_Ab1_59_Ax1_A_58_AS1_A_124_93_A_61_61_62_A_Ia1_M_Ax1_J_A_58_Ar_A_61_61_ATrue_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(X2,c_Tarski_Ointerval(X4,X5,X6,X3),tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_in(X1,X2,X3)
| c_in(c_Pair(X5,X1,X3,X3),X4,tc_prod(X3,X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT006-2.ax',cls_Tarski_O_91_124_AS1_A_60_61_Ainterval_Ar_Aa1_Ab1_59_Ax1_A_58_AS1_A_124_93_A_61_61_62_A_Ia1_M_Ax1_J_A_58_Ar_A_61_61_ATrue_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_7,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_x,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_7) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_S,c_Tarski_Ointerval(v_r,v_a,v_b,t_a),tc_set(t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_6,negated_conjecture,
c_in(v_x,v_S,t_a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_6) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X2,c_Tarski_Ointerval(X4,X5,X6,X3),tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_in(X1,X2,X3)
| c_in(c_Pair(X5,X1,X3,X3),X4,tc_prod(X3,X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Tarski_O_91_124_AS1_A_60_61_Ainterval_Ar_Aa1_Ab1_59_Ax1_A_58_AS1_A_124_93_A_61_61_62_A_Ia1_M_Ax1_J_A_58_Ar_A_61_61_ATrue_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_x,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X2,c_Tarski_Ointerval(X4,X5,X6,X3),tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_in(X1,X2,X3)
| c_in(c_Pair(X5,X1,X3,X3),X4,tc_prod(X3,X3)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_S,c_Tarski_Ointerval(v_r,v_a,v_b,t_a),tc_set(t_a)),
cls_conjecture_2 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_x,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_in(X1,v_S,t_a)
| c_in(c_Pair(v_a,X1,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
c_in(v_x,v_S,t_a),
cls_conjecture_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LAT271-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:29:07 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 7.76/1.64 % Version: 3.5.1
% 7.76/1.64 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 7.76/1.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1019739 completed with status 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 7.76/1.64 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 7.76/1.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 7.76/1.64 % No SInE strategy applied
% 7.76/1.64 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 7.76/1.64 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting U----_206e_00_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting SAT001_CA_MinMin_p005000_rr with 136s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_S5PRR_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1019770 completed with status 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 7.76/1.64 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 7.76/1.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 7.76/1.64 % No SInE strategy applied
% 7.76/1.64 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 7.76/1.64 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 7.76/1.64 % Preprocessing time : 0.032 s
% 7.76/1.64 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 7.76/1.64
% 7.76/1.64 % Proof found!
% 7.76/1.64 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 7.76/1.64 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.76/1.64 % Parsed axioms : 2759
% 7.76/1.64 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Initial clauses : 2759
% 7.76/1.64 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 9
% 7.76/1.64 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2750
% 7.76/1.64 % Processed clauses : 6329
% 7.76/1.64 % ...of these trivial : 24
% 7.76/1.64 % ...subsumed : 1209
% 7.76/1.64 % ...remaining for further processing : 5096
% 7.76/1.64 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 114
% 7.76/1.64 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Backward-subsumed : 18
% 7.76/1.64 % Backward-rewritten : 33
% 7.76/1.64 % Generated clauses : 14611
% 7.76/1.64 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 12127
% 7.76/1.64 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 7.76/1.64 % Paramodulations : 14453
% 7.76/1.64 % Factorizations : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % NegExts : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Equation resolutions : 158
% 7.76/1.64 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Total rewrite steps : 6005
% 7.76/1.64 % ...of those cached : 4993
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional unsat checks : 1
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional check models : 1
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional encoding time : 0.019
% 7.76/1.64 % Propositional solver time : 0.022
% 7.76/1.64 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 7.76/1.64 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 7.76/1.64 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 7.76/1.64 % Current number of processed clauses : 2421
% 7.76/1.64 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 524
% 7.76/1.64 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 7.76/1.64 % Negative unit clauses : 60
% 7.76/1.64 % Non-unit-clauses : 1831
% 7.76/1.64 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 11156
% 7.76/1.64 % ...number of literals in the above : 34013
% 7.76/1.64 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Current number of archived clauses : 2683
% 7.76/1.64 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3443433
% 7.76/1.64 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2202197
% 7.76/1.64 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1105
% 7.76/1.64 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 115803
% 7.76/1.64 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % BW rewrite match attempts : 528
% 7.76/1.64 % BW rewrite match successes : 36
% 7.76/1.64 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Condensation successes : 0
% 7.76/1.64 % Termbank termtop insertions : 353577
% 7.76/1.64 % Search garbage collected termcells : 4032
% 7.76/1.64
% 7.76/1.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 7.76/1.64 % User time : 1.086 s
% 7.76/1.64 % System time : 0.049 s
% 7.76/1.64 % Total time : 1.135 s
% 7.76/1.64 % Maximum resident set size: 8496 pages
% 7.76/1.64
% 7.76/1.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 7.76/1.64 % User time : 5.327 s
% 7.76/1.64 % System time : 0.191 s
% 7.76/1.64 % Total time : 5.518 s
% 7.76/1.64 % Maximum resident set size: 6400 pages
% 7.76/1.64 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------