%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET025-8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 02:13:10 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.17s 0.54s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 11 RR)
% Number of literals : 23 ( 9 equ; 8 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(ordered_pair_predicate3,axiom,
( ~ ordered_pair_predicate(X1)
| X1 = ordered_pair(f2(X1),f3(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET003-0.ax',ordered_pair_predicate3) ).
cnf(ordered_pair,axiom,
ordered_pair(X1,X2) = non_ordered_pair(singleton_set(X1),non_ordered_pair(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET003-0.ax',ordered_pair) ).
cnf(singleton_set,axiom,
singleton_set(X1) = non_ordered_pair(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET003-0.ax',singleton_set) ).
cnf(non_ordered_pair4,axiom,
little_set(non_ordered_pair(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET003-0.ax',non_ordered_pair4) ).
cnf(prove_predicate_is_small,negated_conjecture,
~ little_set(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_predicate_is_small) ).
cnf(an_ordered_pair_predicate,hypothesis,
ordered_pair_predicate(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',an_ordered_pair_predicate) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ ordered_pair_predicate(X1)
| X1 = ordered_pair(f2(X1),f3(X1)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ordered_pair_predicate3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
ordered_pair(X1,X2) = non_ordered_pair(singleton_set(X1),non_ordered_pair(X1,X2)),
ordered_pair ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
singleton_set(X1) = non_ordered_pair(X1,X1),
singleton_set ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ ordered_pair_predicate(X1)
| X1 = ordered_pair(f2(X1),f3(X1)) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
ordered_pair(X1,X2) = non_ordered_pair(non_ordered_pair(X1,X1),non_ordered_pair(X1,X2)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
little_set(non_ordered_pair(X1,X2)),
non_ordered_pair4 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ ordered_pair_predicate(X1)
| X1 = non_ordered_pair(non_ordered_pair(f2(X1),f2(X1)),non_ordered_pair(f2(X1),f3(X1))) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ little_set(a),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_predicate_is_small]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ ordered_pair_predicate(X1)
| little_set(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
ordered_pair_predicate(a),
an_ordered_pair_predicate ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ little_set(a),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET025-8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:48:52 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.43 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
% 0.17/0.54 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 1585021 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.17/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.17/0.54 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.17/0.54 % Search class: FGHSS-FFLS31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.54 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFLS31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.54 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 224s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 216s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2i with 136s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 1585030 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.17/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.17/0.54 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.17/0.54 % Search class: FGHSS-FFLS31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.54 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFLS31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.54 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.54 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.17/0.54 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.17/0.54
% 0.17/0.54 % Proof found!
% 0.17/0.54 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.17/0.54 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.54 % Parsed axioms : 153
% 0.17/0.54 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Initial clauses : 153
% 0.17/0.54 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.17/0.54 % Initial clauses in saturation : 147
% 0.17/0.54 % Processed clauses : 311
% 0.17/0.54 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.17/0.54 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % ...remaining for further processing : 309
% 0.17/0.54 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 18
% 0.17/0.54 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.17/0.54 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Generated clauses : 812
% 0.17/0.54 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 785
% 0.17/0.54 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.17/0.54 % Paramodulations : 789
% 0.17/0.54 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.17/0.54 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Equation resolutions : 21
% 0.17/0.54 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Total rewrite steps : 63
% 0.17/0.54 % ...of those cached : 42
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.54 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.54 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.54 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.54 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.54 % Current number of processed clauses : 149
% 0.17/0.54 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.17/0.54 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.17/0.54 % Non-unit-clauses : 138
% 0.17/0.54 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 766
% 0.17/0.54 % ...number of literals in the above : 2068
% 0.17/0.54 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Current number of archived clauses : 152
% 0.17/0.54 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11137
% 0.17/0.54 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5487
% 0.17/0.54 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 0.17/0.54 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 128
% 0.17/0.54 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/0.54 % Termbank termtop insertions : 20583
% 0.17/0.54 % Search garbage collected termcells : 342
% 0.17/0.54
% 0.17/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.54 % User time : 0.030 s
% 0.17/0.54 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.17/0.54 % Total time : 0.038 s
% 0.17/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 4028 pages
% 0.17/0.54
% 0.17/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.54 % User time : 0.159 s
% 0.17/0.54 % System time : 0.022 s
% 0.17/0.54 % Total time : 0.181 s
% 0.17/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.17/0.54 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------