%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET017-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n016.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 02:13:06 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.25s 0.57s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 30 ( 15 unt; 3 nHn; 25 RR)
% Number of literals : 48 ( 18 equ; 18 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 44 ( 21 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(unordered_pair2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,unordered_pair(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',unordered_pair2) ).
cnf(prove_left_cancellation_1,negated_conjecture,
unordered_pair(x,y) = unordered_pair(x,z),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_left_cancellation_1) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_unordered_pair,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X2) = unordered_pair(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',commutativity_of_unordered_pair) ).
cnf(unordered_pair_member,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',unordered_pair_member) ).
cnf(prove_left_cancellation_3,negated_conjecture,
y != z,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_left_cancellation_3) ).
cnf(corollary_1_to_cartesian_product,axiom,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',corollary_1_to_cartesian_product) ).
cnf(prove_left_cancellation_2,negated_conjecture,
member(ordered_pair(y,z),cross_product(universal_class,universal_class)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_left_cancellation_2) ).
cnf(corollary_2_to_cartesian_product,axiom,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X2,universal_class) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',corollary_2_to_cartesian_product) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,unordered_pair(X1,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
unordered_pair(x,y) = unordered_pair(x,z),
prove_left_cancellation_1 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X2) = unordered_pair(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_unordered_pair ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair_member]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,unordered_pair(X1,X2)) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
unordered_pair(y,x) = unordered_pair(z,x),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
y != z,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_left_cancellation_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[corollary_1_to_cartesian_product]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
( ~ member(y,universal_class)
| member(y,unordered_pair(z,x)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
y != z,
c_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
member(ordered_pair(y,z),cross_product(universal_class,universal_class)),
prove_left_cancellation_2 ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
( ~ member(y,universal_class)
| x = y ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
member(y,universal_class),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
x = y,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X2,universal_class) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[corollary_2_to_cartesian_product]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
unordered_pair(y,y) = unordered_pair(z,y),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_23]),c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X2,universal_class) ),
c_0_24 ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(z,y))
| X1 = y ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
member(z,universal_class),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_12]),c_0_28])]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SET017-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:47:07 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.50 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
% 0.25/0.57 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % new_bool_1 with pid 1581675 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.57 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMS21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1581677 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.57 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMS21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.57 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.25/0.57 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.57 % Parsed axioms : 116
% 0.25/0.57 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 83
% 0.25/0.57 % Initial clauses : 33
% 0.25/0.57 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Initial clauses in saturation : 33
% 0.25/0.57 % Processed clauses : 133
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.25/0.57 % ...subsumed : 51
% 0.25/0.57 % ...remaining for further processing : 77
% 0.25/0.57 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.25/0.57 % Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.25/0.57 % Generated clauses : 444
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 268
% 0.25/0.57 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Paramodulations : 442
% 0.25/0.57 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Total rewrite steps : 216
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of those cached : 154
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of processed clauses : 64
% 0.25/0.57 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 28
% 0.25/0.57 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Non-unit-clauses : 32
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 159
% 0.25/0.57 % ...number of literals in the above : 382
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of archived clauses : 11
% 0.25/0.57 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 177
% 0.25/0.57 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 164
% 0.25/0.57 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 50
% 0.25/0.57 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 0.25/0.57 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % BW rewrite match attempts : 22
% 0.25/0.57 % BW rewrite match successes : 17
% 0.25/0.57 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4683
% 0.25/0.57 % Search garbage collected termcells : 426
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.57 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.57 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 3728 pages
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.57 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.25/0.57 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.25/0.57 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------