%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET060-6 : 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 : n008.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 02:13:20 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 14 ( 5 unt; 0 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 23 ( 0 equ; 12 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(intersection1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection1) ).
cnf(intersection2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection2) ).
cnf(complement1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',complement1) ).
cnf(prove_special_classes_lemma_1,negated_conjecture,
member(y,intersection(complement(x),x)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_special_classes_lemma_1) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection1]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[complement1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
member(y,intersection(complement(x),x)),
prove_special_classes_lemma_1 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
member(y,complement(x)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
member(y,x),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET060-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.35 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:49:25 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40 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
% 0.13/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % new_bool_1 with pid 176292 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 176294 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 92
% 0.13/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 81
% 0.13/0.42 % Initial clauses : 11
% 0.13/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.13/0.42 % Processed clauses : 10
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.13/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Generated clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 0.13/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.13/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 12
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 971
% 0.13/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 413
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.42 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3720 pages
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.42 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------