%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET024-6 : 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 : n006.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 0.10s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 7 RR)
% Number of literals : 16 ( 2 equ; 7 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(unordered_pair3,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',unordered_pair3) ).
cnf(prove_set_in_its_singleton_2,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,singleton(x)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_set_in_its_singleton_2) ).
cnf(singleton_set,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',singleton_set) ).
cnf(prove_set_in_its_singleton_1,negated_conjecture,
member(x,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_set_in_its_singleton_1) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,singleton(x)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_set_in_its_singleton_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
singleton_set ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,singleton(x)),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,singleton(X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
member(x,universal_class),
prove_set_in_its_singleton_1 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET024-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n006.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 04:43:42 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.41 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
% 0.10/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % sh5l with pid 2024185 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.10/0.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.10/0.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2024188 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.10/0.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.10/0.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.47 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.10/0.47
% 0.10/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.10/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 93
% 0.10/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 9
% 0.10/0.47 % Initial clauses : 84
% 0.10/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 84
% 0.10/0.47 % Processed clauses : 46
% 0.10/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 46
% 0.10/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.10/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.10/0.47 % Generated clauses : 25
% 0.10/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 21
% 0.10/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Paramodulations : 23
% 0.10/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.10/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.10/0.47 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 43
% 0.10/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 19
% 0.10/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.10/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 59
% 0.10/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 136
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.10/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 114
% 0.10/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 104
% 0.10/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 20
% 0.10/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.10/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.10/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.10/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2525
% 0.10/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 192
% 0.10/0.47
% 0.10/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.47 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.10/0.47 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3720 pages
% 0.10/0.47
% 0.10/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.47 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.10/0.47 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.10/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.10/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------