%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET063+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n012.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 02:13:22 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.07s 0.34s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.07s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 25 ( 9 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 22 ( 9 ~; 6 |; 4 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 2 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 11 ( 1 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_subset_of_empty_set_is_empty_set,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( subset(X1,empty_set)
=> X1 = empty_set ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_subset_of_empty_set_is_empty_set) ).
fof(equal_defn,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X1 = X2
<=> ( subset(X2,X1)
& subset(X1,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',equal_defn) ).
fof(empty_set_subset,axiom,
! [X1] : subset(empty_set,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',empty_set_subset) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( subset(X1,empty_set)
=> X1 = empty_set ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_subset_of_empty_set_is_empty_set]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X7,X8] :
( ( X7 = X8
| ~ subset(X8,X7)
| ~ subset(X7,X8) )
& ( X7 != X8
| subset(X8,X7) )
& ( X7 != X8
| subset(X7,X8) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[equal_defn])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 != empty_set
& subset(esk1_0,empty_set) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X5] : subset(empty_set,X5),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[empty_set_subset]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ subset(X2,X1)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
subset(esk1_0,empty_set),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
subset(empty_set,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != empty_set,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),c_0_10]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01 % Problem : SET063+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.02 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.03/0.30 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.03/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.03/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.03/0.30 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.03/0.30 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.03/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.03/0.30 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.03/0.30 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:48:40 UTC 2026
% 0.03/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 0.03/0.30 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.33 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.07/0.33 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
% 0.07/0.34 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % new_bool_3 with pid 1590291 completed with status 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.07/0.34 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.07/0.34 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1590294 completed with status 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.07/0.34 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.07/0.34 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.07/0.34
% 0.07/0.34 % Proof found!
% 0.07/0.34 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.07/0.34 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.07/0.34 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.07/0.34 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.07/0.34 % Initial clauses : 11
% 0.07/0.34 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.07/0.34 % Processed clauses : 10
% 0.07/0.34 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.07/0.34 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.07/0.34 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.07/0.34 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Paramodulations : 4
% 0.07/0.34 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % NegExts : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.07/0.34 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.07/0.34 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 0.07/0.34 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.07/0.34 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.07/0.34 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.07/0.34 % ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.07/0.34 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.07/0.34 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.07/0.34 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Termbank termtop insertions : 531
% 0.07/0.34 % Search garbage collected termcells : 140
% 0.07/0.34
% 0.07/0.34 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.07/0.34 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.07/0.34 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.07/0.34
% 0.07/0.34 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.07/0.34 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.07/0.34 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.07/0.34 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------