%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET055-6 : 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 : n010.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 02:13:18 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.18s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.18s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 14 ( 6 unt; 2 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 25 ( 0 equ; 12 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(not_subclass_members2,axiom,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_subclass_members2) ).
cnf(subclass_implies_equal,axiom,
( ~ subclass(X2,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',subclass_implies_equal) ).
cnf(not_subclass_members1,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_subclass_members1) ).
cnf(prove_reflexivity,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(x,x),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_reflexivity) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_subclass_members2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ subclass(X2,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[subclass_implies_equal]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
not_subclass_members1 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(x,x),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_reflexivity]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ subclass(X2,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
subclass(X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(x,x),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
equalish(X1,X1),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET055-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38 % Computer : n010.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 04:48:26 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.43 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
% 0.18/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.18/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.18/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % sh5l with pid 51937 completed with status 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.18/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.18/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.18/0.46 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.18/0.46 % Search class: FGHNM-FFLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.18/0.46 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 51941 completed with status 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.18/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.18/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.18/0.46 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.18/0.46 % Search class: FGHNM-FFLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.18/0.46 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.18/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.18/0.46
% 0.18/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.18/0.46 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.18/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.18/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 159
% 0.18/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.18/0.46 % Initial clauses : 158
% 0.18/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 158
% 0.18/0.46 % Processed clauses : 122
% 0.18/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % ...subsumed : 4
% 0.18/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 118
% 0.18/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.18/0.46 % Generated clauses : 248
% 0.18/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 218
% 0.18/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Paramodulations : 248
% 0.18/0.46 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 7
% 0.18/0.46 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.18/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.18/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.18/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.18/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.18/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 116
% 0.18/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 22
% 0.18/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 94
% 0.18/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 254
% 0.18/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 625
% 0.18/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.18/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1802
% 0.18/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1334
% 0.18/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 0.18/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 42
% 0.18/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 42
% 0.18/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.18/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.18/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 6894
% 0.18/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 259
% 0.18/0.46
% 0.18/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.18/0.46 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.18/0.46 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.18/0.46 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.18/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4028 pages
% 0.18/0.46
% 0.18/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.18/0.46 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.18/0.46 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.18/0.46 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.18/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.18/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------