%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SET071+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 : n009.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 02:16:22 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 90.93s 13.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 90.93s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 63 ( 27 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 11 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 66 ( 23 ~; 22 |; 15 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 ( 0 sgn 15 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(regularity,axiom,
! [X1] :
( X1 != null_class
=> ? [X3] :
( disjoint(X3,X1)
& member(X3,X1)
& member(X3,universal_class) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET005+0.ax',regularity) ).
fof(unordered_pair_defn,axiom,
! [X3,X1,X2] :
( member(X3,unordered_pair(X1,X2))
<=> ( ( X3 = X2
| X3 = X1 )
& member(X3,universal_class) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET005+0.ax',unordered_pair_defn) ).
fof(null_unordered_pair,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( ~ member(X2,universal_class)
& ~ member(X1,universal_class) )
=> unordered_pair(X1,X2) = null_class ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',null_unordered_pair) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X1] :
( X1 != null_class
=> ? [X3] :
( disjoint(X3,X1)
& member(X3,X1)
& member(X3,universal_class) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[regularity]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X19,X20,X21] :
( ( member(X19,unordered_pair(X20,X21))
| ~ member(X19,universal_class)
| X19 != X21 )
& ( member(X19,unordered_pair(X20,X21))
| ~ member(X19,universal_class)
| X19 != X20 )
& ( ~ member(X19,unordered_pair(X20,X21))
| X19 = X21
| X19 = X20 )
& ( ~ member(X19,unordered_pair(X20,X21))
| member(X19,universal_class) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair_defn])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X101] :
( ( X101 = null_class
| disjoint(esk6_1(X101),X101) )
& ( X101 = null_class
| member(esk6_1(X101),X101) )
& ( X101 = null_class
| member(esk6_1(X101),universal_class) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( ( ~ member(X2,universal_class)
& ~ member(X1,universal_class) )
=> unordered_pair(X1,X2) = null_class ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[null_unordered_pair]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( X1 = null_class
| member(esk6_1(X1),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( ( ~ member(X2,universal_class)
& ~ member(X1,universal_class) )
=> unordered_pair(X1,X2) = null_class ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( X1 = null_class
| member(esk6_1(X1),universal_class) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( unordered_pair(X1,X2) = null_class
| esk6_1(unordered_pair(X1,X2)) = X2
| esk6_1(unordered_pair(X1,X2)) = X1 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( unordered_pair(esk8_0,esk9_0) != null_class
& ~ member(esk9_0,universal_class)
& ~ member(esk8_0,universal_class) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( member(X2,universal_class)
| unordered_pair(X1,X2) = null_class
| esk6_1(unordered_pair(X1,X2)) = X1 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ member(esk8_0,universal_class),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X2,universal_class)
| unordered_pair(X1,X2) = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ member(esk9_0,universal_class),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
( member(X1,universal_class)
| unordered_pair(esk8_0,X1) = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
unordered_pair(esk8_0,esk9_0) != null_class,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET071+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38 % Computer : n009.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 04:49:57 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.42 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
% 90.93/13.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 90.93/13.61 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 90.93/13.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 877494 completed with status 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 90.93/13.61 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 90.93/13.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 90.93/13.61 % No SInE strategy applied
% 90.93/13.61 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS21-DFFFFFNN
% 90.93/13.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting sh3 with 271s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 271s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 271s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % new_ho_10_cnf2 with pid 877504 completed with status 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Result found by new_ho_10_cnf2
% 90.93/13.61 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 90.93/13.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 90.93/13.61 % No SInE strategy applied
% 90.93/13.61 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS21-DFFFFFNN
% 90.93/13.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting sh3 with 271s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 271s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 271s (1) cores
% 90.93/13.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 90.93/13.61 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 90.93/13.61
% 90.93/13.61 % Proof found!
% 90.93/13.61 % SZS status Theorem
% 90.93/13.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 90.93/13.61 % Parsed axioms : 44
% 90.93/13.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Initial clauses : 92
% 90.93/13.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 8
% 90.93/13.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 84
% 90.93/13.61 % Processed clauses : 4894
% 90.93/13.61 % ...of these trivial : 73
% 90.93/13.61 % ...subsumed : 2137
% 90.93/13.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 2684
% 90.93/13.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 74
% 90.93/13.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Backward-subsumed : 66
% 90.93/13.61 % Backward-rewritten : 293
% 90.93/13.61 % Generated clauses : 422296
% 90.93/13.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 410495
% 90.93/13.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 102
% 90.93/13.61 % Paramodulations : 421812
% 90.93/13.61 % Factorizations : 410
% 90.93/13.61 % NegExts : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Equation resolutions : 74
% 90.93/13.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Total rewrite steps : 167418
% 90.93/13.61 % ...of those cached : 165830
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 90.93/13.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 90.93/13.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 90.93/13.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 90.93/13.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 90.93/13.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 2236
% 90.93/13.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 78
% 90.93/13.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Negative unit clauses : 62
% 90.93/13.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 2096
% 90.93/13.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 405366
% 90.93/13.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 2101153
% 90.93/13.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 450
% 90.93/13.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 956473
% 90.93/13.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 337315
% 90.93/13.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1291
% 90.93/13.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 52740
% 90.93/13.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 90.93/13.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 239
% 90.93/13.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 41
% 90.93/13.61 % Condensation attempts : 4894
% 90.93/13.61 % Condensation successes : 77
% 90.93/13.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 41639528
% 90.93/13.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 977
% 90.93/13.61
% 90.93/13.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 90.93/13.61 % User time : 12.581 s
% 90.93/13.61 % System time : 0.287 s
% 90.93/13.61 % Total time : 12.869 s
% 90.93/13.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3948 pages
% 90.93/13.61
% 90.93/13.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 90.93/13.61 % User time : 62.742 s
% 90.93/13.61 % System time : 2.157 s
% 90.93/13.61 % Total time : 64.898 s
% 90.93/13.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 90.93/13.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------