%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SET065-7 : 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 : n006.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 02:16:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 0 equ; 13 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(subclass_members,axiom,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',subclass_members) ).
cnf(inductive1,axiom,
( ~ inductive(X1)
| member(null_class,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',inductive1) ).
cnf(class_elements_are_sets,axiom,
subclass(X1,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',class_elements_are_sets) ).
cnf(omega_is_inductive1,axiom,
inductive(omega),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',omega_is_inductive1) ).
cnf(prove_null_class_is_a_set_1,negated_conjecture,
~ member(null_class,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_null_class_is_a_set_1) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[subclass_members]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ inductive(X1)
| member(null_class,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inductive1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
subclass(X1,universal_class),
class_elements_are_sets ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ inductive(X1)
| member(null_class,X1) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
inductive(omega),
omega_is_inductive1 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ member(null_class,universal_class),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_null_class_is_a_set_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
member(null_class,omega),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ member(null_class,universal_class),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET065-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:49:15 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.11/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 2034410 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2034417 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 107
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses : 107
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 15
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 92
% 0.11/0.45 % Processed clauses : 57
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % ...subsumed : 5
% 0.11/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 52
% 0.11/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Generated clauses : 68
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 50
% 0.11/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Paramodulations : 66
% 0.11/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 10
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of those cached : 4
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 49
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 14
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 33
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 84
% 0.11/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 205
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 16
% 0.11/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 182
% 0.11/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 120
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.11/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4948
% 0.11/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 175
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3468 pages
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.038 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.052 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------