%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET062+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n017.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 02:13:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 22 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 19 ( 10 ~; 5 |; 2 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 ( 2 sgn 13 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(null_class_defn,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ member(X1,null_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET005+0.ax',null_class_defn) ).
fof(null_class_is_subclass,conjecture,
! [X1] : subclass(null_class,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',null_class_is_subclass) ).
fof(subclass_defn,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subclass(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X3] :
( member(X3,X1)
=> member(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET005+0.ax',subclass_defn) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X1] : ~ member(X1,null_class),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[null_class_defn]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : subclass(null_class,X1),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[null_class_is_subclass]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X20] : ~ member(X20,null_class),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15] :
( ( subclass(X14,X15)
| ~ member(esk2_2(X14,X15),X15) )
& ( subclass(X14,X15)
| member(esk2_2(X14,X15),X14) )
& ( member(X13,X12)
| ~ member(X13,X11)
| ~ subclass(X11,X12) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[subclass_defn])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(null_class,esk1_0),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
~ member(X1,null_class),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(null_class,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
subclass(null_class,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET062+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:43:58 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40 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
% 0.13/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN 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_3 with pid 1455428 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 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: FGUSF-FFSF22-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 1455431 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 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: FGUSF-FFSF22-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 Theorem
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 44
% 0.13/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 39
% 0.13/0.42 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.13/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.13/0.42 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 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 : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.13/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Paramodulations : 1
% 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 : 5
% 0.13/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.13/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 8
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 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 : 3
% 0.13/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.13/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 889
% 0.13/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 426
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.42 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3692 pages
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.42 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.13/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------