%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM555+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n017.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 01:55:29 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.17s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 93 ( 19 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 52 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 128 ( 53 ~; 50 |; 19 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 21 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 0 sgn 14 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(mDefDiff,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( aElement0(X2)
& aSet0(X1) )
=> ! [X3] :
( X3 = sdtmndt0(X1,X2)
<=> ( ! [X4] :
( aElementOf0(X4,X3)
<=> ( X4 != X2
& aElementOf0(X4,X1)
& aElement0(X4) ) )
& aSet0(X3) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mDefDiff) ).
fof(m__,conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(xx,sdtmndt0(xQ,xy)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(m__2323,hypothesis,
~ aElementOf0(xx,xQ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2323) ).
fof(m__2304,hypothesis,
( aElementOf0(xy,xQ)
& aElement0(xy) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2304) ).
fof(m__2291,hypothesis,
( sbrdtbr0(xQ) = xk
& isFinite0(xQ)
& aSet0(xQ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__2291) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( aElement0(X2)
& aSet0(X1) )
=> ! [X3] :
( X3 = sdtmndt0(X1,X2)
<=> ( ! [X4] :
( aElementOf0(X4,X3)
<=> ( X4 != X2
& aElementOf0(X4,X1)
& aElement0(X4) ) )
& aSet0(X3) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mDefDiff]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X59,X60,X61,X62,X63,X64] :
( ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X64 = sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aSet0(X64)
| aElementOf0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64),X64)
| esk6_3(X59,X60,X64) != X60 )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X64 = sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aSet0(X64)
| aElementOf0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64),X64)
| aElementOf0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64),X59) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X64 = sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aSet0(X64)
| aElementOf0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64),X64)
| aElement0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64)) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X64 = sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aSet0(X64)
| esk6_3(X59,X60,X64) = X60
| ~ aElementOf0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64),X59)
| ~ aElement0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64))
| ~ aElementOf0(esk6_3(X59,X60,X64),X64) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X61 != sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| aElementOf0(X63,X61)
| X63 = X60
| ~ aElementOf0(X63,X59)
| ~ aElement0(X63) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X61 != sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aElementOf0(X62,X61)
| X62 != X60 )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X61 != sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aElementOf0(X62,X61)
| aElementOf0(X62,X59) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X61 != sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| ~ aElementOf0(X62,X61)
| aElement0(X62) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X60)
| ~ aSet0(X59)
| X61 != sdtmndt0(X59,X60)
| aSet0(X61) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ aElementOf0(xx,sdtmndt0(xQ,xy)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_8,hypothesis,
~ aElementOf0(xx,xQ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m__2323]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ aElement0(X4)
| ~ aSet0(X2)
| X3 != sdtmndt0(X2,X4)
| ~ aElementOf0(X1,X3)
| aElementOf0(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
aElementOf0(xx,sdtmndt0(xQ,xy)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,hypothesis,
~ aElementOf0(xx,xQ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ aSet0(X2)
| ~ aElement0(X3)
| ~ aElementOf0(X1,sdtmndt0(X2,X3))
| aElementOf0(X1,X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
aElementOf0(xx,sdtmndt0(xQ,xy)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
aElement0(xy),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__2304]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
aSet0(xQ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__2291]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
~ aElementOf0(xx,xQ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM555+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:34:43 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.39 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.39 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.43 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
% 0.17/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % new_bool_1 with pid 1237938 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.47 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1237940 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.47 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.17/0.47
% 0.17/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.17/0.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.17/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 71
% 0.17/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 5
% 0.17/0.47 % Initial clauses : 116
% 0.17/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.17/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 111
% 0.17/0.47 % Processed clauses : 166
% 0.17/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.17/0.47 % ...subsumed : 20
% 0.17/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 145
% 0.17/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 21
% 0.17/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 6
% 0.17/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.17/0.47 % Generated clauses : 184
% 0.17/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 134
% 0.17/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 5
% 0.17/0.47 % Paramodulations : 164
% 0.17/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 22
% 0.17/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 133
% 0.17/0.47 % ...of those cached : 109
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 115
% 0.17/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 31
% 0.17/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.17/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 77
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 76
% 0.17/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 407
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 14
% 0.17/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1786
% 0.17/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 849
% 0.17/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 21
% 0.17/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 198
% 0.17/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 8
% 0.17/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.17/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 11550
% 0.17/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2065
% 0.17/0.47
% 0.17/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.47 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.17/0.47 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3964 pages
% 0.17/0.47
% 0.17/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.47 % User time : 0.018 s
% 0.17/0.47 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.17/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------