%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM190-1 : 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 : n007.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 01:44:28 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 22 ( 9 unt; 4 nHn; 18 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 9 equ; 14 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 23 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(inductive1,axiom,
( ~ inductive(X1)
| member(null_class,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',inductive1) ).
cnf(omega_is_inductive1,axiom,
inductive(omega),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',omega_is_inductive1) ).
cnf(prove_omega_is_not_null_1,negated_conjecture,
omega = null_class,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_omega_is_not_null_1) ).
cnf(intersection1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection1) ).
cnf(complement1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',complement1) ).
cnf(regularity2,axiom,
( intersection(X1,regular(X1)) = null_class
| X1 = null_class ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',regularity2) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ inductive(X1)
| member(null_class,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inductive1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
inductive(omega),
omega_is_inductive1 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
omega = null_class,
prove_omega_is_not_null_1 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[complement1]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ inductive(X1)
| member(null_class,X1) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
inductive(null_class),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
( intersection(X1,regular(X1)) = null_class
| X1 = null_class ),
regularity2 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
member(null_class,null_class),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ member(X2,null_class)
| member(X2,X1)
| X1 = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
~ member(null_class,complement(null_class)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( member(null_class,X1)
| X1 = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
complement(null_class) = null_class,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_20]),c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : NUM190-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.42 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.42 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.14/0.42 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.14/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:08:52 UTC 2026
% 0.14/0.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.51 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.52 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
% 0.24/0.60 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 4141148 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.60 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.60 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % new_bool_3 with pid 4141157 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.60 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.60 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.60 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/0.60 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.60 % Parsed axioms : 159
% 0.24/0.60 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Initial clauses : 159
% 0.24/0.60 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 19
% 0.24/0.60 % Initial clauses in saturation : 140
% 0.24/0.60 % Processed clauses : 196
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % ...remaining for further processing : 196
% 0.24/0.60 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 6
% 0.24/0.60 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Backward-rewritten : 10
% 0.24/0.60 % Generated clauses : 40
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 38
% 0.24/0.60 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Paramodulations : 34
% 0.24/0.60 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.24/0.60 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Total rewrite steps : 18
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of those cached : 11
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of processed clauses : 41
% 0.24/0.60 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 0.24/0.60 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.60 % Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 121
% 0.24/0.60 % ...number of literals in the above : 274
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of archived clauses : 168
% 0.24/0.60 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2092
% 0.24/0.60 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1320
% 0.24/0.60 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 17
% 0.24/0.60 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % BW rewrite match attempts : 11
% 0.24/0.60 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.24/0.60 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Termbank termtop insertions : 10356
% 0.24/0.60 % Search garbage collected termcells : 285
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.60 % User time : 0.027 s
% 0.24/0.60 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Total time : 0.031 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 3780 pages
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.60 % User time : 0.059 s
% 0.24/0.60 % System time : 0.023 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Total time : 0.082 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.60 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------