%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : RNG101+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n008.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 02:05:51 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 69 ( 22 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 32 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 88 ( 36 ~; 37 |; 12 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 19 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 25 ( 0 sgn 11 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(mDefPrIdeal,axiom,
! [X1] :
( aElement0(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( X2 = slsdtgt0(X1)
<=> ( ! [X3] :
( aElementOf0(X3,X2)
<=> ? [X4] :
( sdtasdt0(X1,X4) = X3
& aElement0(X4) ) )
& aSet0(X2) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mDefPrIdeal) ).
fof(m__,conjecture,
? [X1] :
( sdtasdt0(xc,X1) = xx
& aElement0(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(m__1933,hypothesis,
( aElement0(xz)
& aElementOf0(xy,slsdtgt0(xc))
& aElementOf0(xx,slsdtgt0(xc)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__1933) ).
fof(m__1905,hypothesis,
aElement0(xc),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__1905) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X105,X106,X107,X109,X110,X111,X113] :
( ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X111 = slsdtgt0(X105)
| ~ aSet0(X111)
| aElementOf0(esk19_2(X105,X111),X111)
| sdtasdt0(X105,esk20_2(X105,X111)) = esk19_2(X105,X111) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X111 = slsdtgt0(X105)
| ~ aSet0(X111)
| aElementOf0(esk19_2(X105,X111),X111)
| aElement0(esk20_2(X105,X111)) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X111 = slsdtgt0(X105)
| ~ aSet0(X111)
| sdtasdt0(X105,X113) != esk19_2(X105,X111)
| ~ aElement0(X113)
| ~ aElementOf0(esk19_2(X105,X111),X111) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X106 != slsdtgt0(X105)
| aElementOf0(X109,X106)
| sdtasdt0(X105,X110) != X109
| ~ aElement0(X110) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X106 != slsdtgt0(X105)
| ~ aElementOf0(X107,X106)
| sdtasdt0(X105,esk18_3(X105,X106,X107)) = X107 )
& ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X106 != slsdtgt0(X105)
| ~ aElementOf0(X107,X106)
| aElement0(esk18_3(X105,X106,X107)) )
& ( ~ aElement0(X105)
| X106 != slsdtgt0(X105)
| aSet0(X106) ) ),
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)],[mDefPrIdeal])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] :
( sdtasdt0(xc,X1) = xx
& aElement0(X1) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ aElement0(X1)
| X2 != slsdtgt0(X1)
| ~ aElementOf0(X3,X2)
| sdtasdt0(X1,esk18_3(X1,X2,X3)) = X3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ aElement0(X1)
| X2 != slsdtgt0(X1)
| ~ aElementOf0(X3,X2)
| aElement0(esk18_3(X1,X2,X3)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X115] :
( sdtasdt0(xc,X115) != xx
| ~ aElement0(X115) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ aElement0(X1)
| ~ aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(X1))
| sdtasdt0(X1,esk18_3(X1,slsdtgt0(X1),X2)) = X2 ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
aElementOf0(xx,slsdtgt0(xc)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__1933]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
aElement0(xc),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__1905]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ aElement0(X1)
| ~ aElementOf0(X2,slsdtgt0(X1))
| aElement0(esk18_3(X1,slsdtgt0(X1),X2)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( sdtasdt0(xc,X1) != xx
| ~ aElement0(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
sdtasdt0(xc,esk18_3(xc,slsdtgt0(xc),xx)) = xx,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
aElement0(esk18_3(xc,slsdtgt0(xc),xx)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : RNG101+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.44 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.44 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:20:38 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.52 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
% 0.26/0.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.26/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 126644 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.26/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.61 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.61 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2q with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % G-E--_208_B07_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2q with pid 126652 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Result found by G-E--_208_B07_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2q
% 0.26/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.61 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.61 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2q with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.61 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.26/0.61
% 0.26/0.61 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.61 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/0.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.61 % Parsed axioms : 40
% 0.26/0.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Initial clauses : 97
% 0.26/0.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.26/0.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 93
% 0.26/0.61 % Processed clauses : 224
% 0.26/0.61 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.26/0.61 % ...subsumed : 32
% 0.26/0.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 190
% 0.26/0.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 16
% 0.26/0.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.26/0.61 % Generated clauses : 219
% 0.26/0.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 188
% 0.26/0.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.26/0.61 % Paramodulations : 205
% 0.26/0.61 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Equation resolutions : 16
% 0.26/0.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Total rewrite steps : 127
% 0.26/0.61 % ...of those cached : 118
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 80
% 0.26/0.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 13
% 0.26/0.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.26/0.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 66
% 0.26/0.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 147
% 0.26/0.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 594
% 0.26/0.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 96
% 0.26/0.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2414
% 0.26/0.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 948
% 0.26/0.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 34
% 0.26/0.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.26/0.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.26/0.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 11500
% 0.26/0.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1843
% 0.26/0.61
% 0.26/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.61 % User time : 0.039 s
% 0.26/0.61 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.26/0.61 % Total time : 0.044 s
% 0.26/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3432 pages
% 0.26/0.61
% 0.26/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.61 % User time : 0.114 s
% 0.26/0.61 % System time : 0.024 s
% 0.26/0.61 % Total time : 0.138 s
% 0.26/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.26/0.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------