%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM609+3 : 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 : n015.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 01:49:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.90s 0.69s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.90s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 44 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 14 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 48 ( 14 ~; 10 |; 18 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 0 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__5164,hypothesis,
( xP = sdtmndt0(xQ,szmzizndt0(xQ))
& ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xP)
<=> ( X1 != szmzizndt0(xQ)
& aElementOf0(X1,xQ)
& aElement0(X1) ) )
& ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xQ)
=> sdtlseqdt0(szmzizndt0(xQ),X1) )
& aSet0(xP) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__5164) ).
fof(m__,conjecture,
( aSubsetOf0(xP,xQ)
| ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xP)
=> aElementOf0(X1,xQ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(c_0_2,hypothesis,
( xP = sdtmndt0(xQ,szmzizndt0(xQ))
& ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xP)
<=> ( X1 != szmzizndt0(xQ)
& aElementOf0(X1,xQ)
& aElement0(X1) ) )
& ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xQ)
=> sdtlseqdt0(szmzizndt0(xQ),X1) )
& aSet0(xP) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m__5164]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ( aSubsetOf0(xP,xQ)
| ! [X1] :
( aElementOf0(X1,xP)
=> aElementOf0(X1,xQ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_4,hypothesis,
! [X92,X93] :
( xP = sdtmndt0(xQ,szmzizndt0(xQ))
& ( aElementOf0(X93,xP)
| X93 = szmzizndt0(xQ)
| ~ aElementOf0(X93,xQ)
| ~ aElement0(X93) )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X93,xP)
| X93 != szmzizndt0(xQ) )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X93,xP)
| aElementOf0(X93,xQ) )
& ( ~ aElementOf0(X93,xP)
| aElement0(X93) )
& ( sdtlseqdt0(szmzizndt0(xQ),X92)
| ~ aElementOf0(X92,xQ) )
& aSet0(xP) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ aSubsetOf0(xP,xQ)
& ~ aElementOf0(esk23_0,xQ)
& aElementOf0(esk23_0,xP) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,hypothesis,
( ~ aElementOf0(X1,xP)
| aElementOf0(X1,xQ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
aElementOf0(esk23_0,xP),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ aElementOf0(esk23_0,xQ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : NUM609+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n015.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 : Mon Sep 21 02:47:35 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
% 0.90/0.69 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.90/0.69 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.69 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % new_bool_1 with pid 390768 completed with status 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.90/0.69 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.69 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.90/0.69 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.90/0.69 % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.90/0.69 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % SubtermCWHack with pid 390804 completed with status 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.90/0.69 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.69 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.90/0.69 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.90/0.69 % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.90/0.69 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.90/0.69 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.69 % Preprocessing time : 0.096 s
% 0.90/0.69
% 0.90/0.69 % Proof found!
% 0.90/0.69 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.90/0.69 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.90/0.69 % Parsed axioms : 107
% 0.90/0.69 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 9
% 0.90/0.69 % Initial clauses : 4881
% 0.90/0.69 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 0.90/0.69 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4874
% 0.90/0.69 % Processed clauses : 93
% 0.90/0.69 % ...of these trivial : 4
% 0.90/0.69 % ...subsumed : 5
% 0.90/0.69 % ...remaining for further processing : 84
% 0.90/0.69 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.90/0.69 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Generated clauses : 23
% 0.90/0.69 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15
% 0.90/0.69 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Paramodulations : 19
% 0.90/0.69 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % NegExts : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.90/0.69 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Total rewrite steps : 24
% 0.90/0.69 % ...of those cached : 9
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.69 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.69 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.69 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.69 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.69 % Current number of processed clauses : 80
% 0.90/0.69 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 53
% 0.90/0.69 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.90/0.69 % Non-unit-clauses : 20
% 0.90/0.69 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4796
% 0.90/0.69 % ...number of literals in the above : 55797
% 0.90/0.69 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 60
% 0.90/0.69 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 58
% 0.90/0.69 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.90/0.69 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 37
% 0.90/0.69 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.90/0.69 % Termbank termtop insertions : 380943
% 0.90/0.69 % Search garbage collected termcells : 31511
% 0.90/0.69
% 0.90/0.69 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.90/0.69 % User time : 0.220 s
% 0.90/0.69 % System time : 0.025 s
% 0.90/0.69 % Total time : 0.245 s
% 0.90/0.69 % Maximum resident set size: 15852 pages
% 0.90/0.69
% 0.90/0.69 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.90/0.69 % User time : 0.226 s
% 0.90/0.69 % System time : 0.031 s
% 0.90/0.69 % Total time : 0.257 s
% 0.90/0.69 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.90/0.69 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------