%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SET095-6 : 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 02:16:30 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.50s 0.50s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.50s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 9 unt; 7 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 35 ( 11 equ; 11 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(unordered_pair_member,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',unordered_pair_member) ).
cnf(not_subclass_members1,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',not_subclass_members1) ).
cnf(prove_property_of_singletons2_2,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(singleton(x),y),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_property_of_singletons2_2) ).
cnf(not_subclass_members2,axiom,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',not_subclass_members2) ).
cnf(singleton_set,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',singleton_set) ).
cnf(prove_property_of_singletons2_1,negated_conjecture,
member(x,y),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_property_of_singletons2_1) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair_member]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
not_subclass_members1 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(singleton(x),y),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_property_of_singletons2_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_subclass_members2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( subclass(unordered_pair(X1,X2),X3)
| not_subclass_element(unordered_pair(X1,X2),X3) = X1
| not_subclass_element(unordered_pair(X1,X2),X3) = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(singleton(x),y),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
singleton_set ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( subclass(unordered_pair(X1,X1),X2)
| not_subclass_element(unordered_pair(X1,X1),X2) = X1 ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(unordered_pair(x,x),y),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| subclass(unordered_pair(X1,X1),X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
member(x,y),
prove_property_of_singletons2_1 ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET095-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:53:11 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41 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
% 0.50/0.49 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.50/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.50/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 184854 completed with status 0
% 0.50/0.49 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.50/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.50/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.50/0.49 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.50/0.49 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.50/0.49 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.49 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.50 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.50 % SubtermCWHack with pid 184858 completed with status 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.50/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.50/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.50/0.50 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.50/0.50 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.50/0.50 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.50/0.50 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.50/0.50 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.50/0.50 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.50/0.50 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.50/0.50
% 0.50/0.50 % Proof found!
% 0.50/0.50 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.50/0.50 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.50/0.50 % Parsed axioms : 93
% 0.50/0.50 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Initial clauses : 93
% 0.50/0.50 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 15
% 0.50/0.50 % Initial clauses in saturation : 78
% 0.50/0.50 % Processed clauses : 604
% 0.50/0.50 % ...of these trivial : 7
% 0.50/0.50 % ...subsumed : 288
% 0.50/0.50 % ...remaining for further processing : 309
% 0.50/0.50 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 7
% 0.50/0.50 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Backward-subsumed : 6
% 0.50/0.50 % Backward-rewritten : 31
% 0.50/0.50 % Generated clauses : 1876
% 0.50/0.50 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1480
% 0.50/0.50 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 5
% 0.50/0.50 % Paramodulations : 1865
% 0.50/0.50 % Factorizations : 4
% 0.50/0.50 % NegExts : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Equation resolutions : 7
% 0.50/0.50 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Total rewrite steps : 689
% 0.50/0.50 % ...of those cached : 565
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.50/0.50 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.50/0.50 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.50/0.50 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.50/0.50 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.50/0.50 % Current number of processed clauses : 269
% 0.50/0.50 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 47
% 0.50/0.50 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.50/0.50 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.50/0.50 % Non-unit-clauses : 219
% 0.50/0.50 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 891
% 0.50/0.50 % ...number of literals in the above : 2613
% 0.50/0.50 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Current number of archived clauses : 52
% 0.50/0.50 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9485
% 0.50/0.50 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6231
% 0.50/0.50 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 231
% 0.50/0.50 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 443
% 0.50/0.50 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % BW rewrite match attempts : 39
% 0.50/0.50 % BW rewrite match successes : 20
% 0.50/0.50 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.50/0.50 % Termbank termtop insertions : 49361
% 0.50/0.50 % Search garbage collected termcells : 156
% 0.50/0.50
% 0.50/0.50 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.50/0.50 % User time : 0.053 s
% 0.50/0.50 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.50/0.50 % Total time : 0.059 s
% 0.50/0.50 % Maximum resident set size: 3720 pages
% 0.50/0.50
% 0.50/0.50 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.50/0.50 % User time : 0.247 s
% 0.50/0.50 % System time : 0.022 s
% 0.50/0.50 % Total time : 0.268 s
% 0.50/0.50 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.50/0.50 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------