%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM180-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n002.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 01:44:27 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 0.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 6 unt; 3 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 2 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(intersection2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection2) ).
cnf(limit_ordinals,axiom,
intersection(complement(kind_1_ordinals),ordinal_numbers) = limit_ordinals,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM004-0.ax',limit_ordinals) ).
cnf(not_subclass_members2,axiom,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',not_subclass_members2) ).
cnf(not_subclass_members1,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',not_subclass_members1) ).
cnf(prove_limit_ordinals_are_ordinals_1,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(limit_ordinals,ordinal_numbers),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_limit_ordinals_are_ordinals_1) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
intersection(complement(kind_1_ordinals),ordinal_numbers) = limit_ordinals,
limit_ordinals ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_subclass_members2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ member(X1,limit_ordinals)
| member(X1,ordinal_numbers) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
not_subclass_members1 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(limit_ordinals,ordinal_numbers),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_limit_ordinals_are_ordinals_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( subclass(limit_ordinals,X1)
| member(not_subclass_element(limit_ordinals,X1),ordinal_numbers) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(limit_ordinals,ordinal_numbers),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : NUM180-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.46 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.21/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.21/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.21/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.21/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.21/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.21/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.21/0.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:13:20 UTC 2026
% 0.21/0.47 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.56 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.56 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
% 0.24/0.64 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 2212965 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.24/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.64 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.64 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.64 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2212972 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.64 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.64 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.64 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/0.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.64 % Preprocessing time : 0.005 s
% 0.24/0.64
% 0.24/0.64 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.64 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/0.64 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.64 % Parsed axioms : 159
% 0.24/0.64 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Initial clauses : 159
% 0.24/0.64 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 19
% 0.24/0.64 % Initial clauses in saturation : 140
% 0.24/0.64 % Processed clauses : 73
% 0.24/0.64 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.24/0.64 % ...remaining for further processing : 71
% 0.24/0.64 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.24/0.64 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.24/0.64 % Generated clauses : 57
% 0.24/0.64 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 52
% 0.24/0.64 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Paramodulations : 55
% 0.24/0.64 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.24/0.64 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.24/0.64 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.64 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.64 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.64 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.64 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.64 % Current number of processed clauses : 68
% 0.24/0.64 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 20
% 0.24/0.64 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.64 % Non-unit-clauses : 47
% 0.24/0.64 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 119
% 0.24/0.64 % ...number of literals in the above : 287
% 0.24/0.64 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Current number of archived clauses : 20
% 0.24/0.64 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 199
% 0.24/0.64 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 157
% 0.24/0.64 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.24/0.64 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.24/0.64 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % BW rewrite match attempts : 9
% 0.24/0.64 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.24/0.64 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.64 % Termbank termtop insertions : 7108
% 0.24/0.64 % Search garbage collected termcells : 287
% 0.24/0.64
% 0.24/0.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.64 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.24/0.64 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.24/0.64 % Total time : 0.028 s
% 0.24/0.64 % Maximum resident set size: 3728 pages
% 0.24/0.64
% 0.24/0.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.64 % User time : 0.067 s
% 0.24/0.64 % System time : 0.027 s
% 0.24/0.64 % Total time : 0.094 s
% 0.24/0.64 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.64 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------