%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET024-4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.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 02:13:09 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.29s 0.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.29s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 7 RR)
% Number of literals : 20 ( 5 equ; 11 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 13 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(prove_membership_of_singleton_set,negated_conjecture,
~ member(a,singleton_set(a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_membership_of_singleton_set) ).
cnf(non_ordered_pair3,axiom,
( X1 != X3
| ~ little_set(X1)
| member(X1,non_ordered_pair(X2,X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET003-0.ax',non_ordered_pair3) ).
cnf(singleton_set,axiom,
singleton_set(X1) = non_ordered_pair(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET003-0.ax',singleton_set) ).
cnf(a_little_set,hypothesis,
little_set(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_little_set) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ member(a,singleton_set(a)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_membership_of_singleton_set]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( X1 != X3
| ~ little_set(X1)
| member(X1,non_ordered_pair(X2,X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[non_ordered_pair3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ member(a,singleton_set(a)),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
singleton_set(X1) = non_ordered_pair(X1,X1),
singleton_set ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( X1 != X3
| ~ little_set(X1)
| member(X1,non_ordered_pair(X2,X3)) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ member(a,non_ordered_pair(a,a)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ little_set(X1)
| member(X1,non_ordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
little_set(a),
a_little_set ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SET024-4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.49 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.49 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.49 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.49 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.49 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.49 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.49 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.49 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:43:42 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.49 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.49 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.59 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.59 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
% 0.29/0.67 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.29/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % new_bool_3 with pid 862894 completed with status 0
% 0.29/0.67 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.29/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.29/0.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.29/0.67 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.29/0.67 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % SubtermCWHack with pid 862897 completed with status 0
% 0.29/0.67 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.29/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.29/0.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.29/0.67 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.29/0.67 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.29/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.67 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.29/0.67
% 0.29/0.67 % Proof found!
% 0.29/0.67 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.29/0.67 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.29/0.68 % Parsed axioms : 143
% 0.29/0.68 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 131
% 0.29/0.68 % Initial clauses : 12
% 0.29/0.68 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.29/0.68 % Processed clauses : 9
% 0.29/0.68 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % ...remaining for further processing : 9
% 0.29/0.68 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.29/0.68 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.29/0.68 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Paramodulations : 5
% 0.29/0.68 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % NegExts : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.29/0.68 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.68 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.68 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.68 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.68 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.68 % Current number of processed clauses : 7
% 0.29/0.68 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.29/0.68 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.29/0.68 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 6
% 0.29/0.68 % ...number of literals in the above : 21
% 0.29/0.68 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.29/0.68 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.29/0.68 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.29/0.68 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1438
% 0.29/0.68 % Search garbage collected termcells : 659
% 0.29/0.68
% 0.29/0.68 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/0.68 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.29/0.68 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.29/0.68 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.29/0.68 % Maximum resident set size: 3716 pages
% 0.29/0.68
% 0.29/0.68 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/0.68 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.29/0.68 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.29/0.68 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.29/0.68 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.29/0.68 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------