%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET118-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n018.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 02:13:39 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 19 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 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 : 13 ( 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(class_elements_are_sets,axiom,
subclass(X1,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',class_elements_are_sets) ).
cnf(prove_corollary_2_to_ordered_pairs_are_sets_2,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_corollary_2_to_ordered_pairs_are_sets_2) ).
cnf(prove_corollary_2_to_ordered_pairs_are_sets_1,negated_conjecture,
member(x,cross_product(universal_class,universal_class)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_corollary_2_to_ordered_pairs_are_sets_1) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[subclass_members]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
subclass(X1,universal_class),
class_elements_are_sets ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_corollary_2_to_ordered_pairs_are_sets_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
member(x,cross_product(universal_class,universal_class)),
prove_corollary_2_to_ordered_pairs_are_sets_1 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SET118-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n018.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
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:56:28 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
% 0.14/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % new_bool_1 with pid 1006831 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.44 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1006834 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.44 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.44 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 165
% 0.14/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 107
% 0.14/0.44 % Initial clauses : 58
% 0.14/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 58
% 0.14/0.44 % Processed clauses : 134
% 0.14/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.14/0.44 % ...subsumed : 66
% 0.14/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 63
% 0.14/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.14/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.14/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.14/0.44 % Generated clauses : 418
% 0.14/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 252
% 0.14/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Paramodulations : 415
% 0.14/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 3
% 0.14/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 152
% 0.14/0.44 % ...of those cached : 113
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 57
% 0.14/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 22
% 0.14/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.14/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.14/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 31
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 176
% 0.14/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 483
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.14/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 161
% 0.14/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 143
% 0.14/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 61
% 0.14/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8
% 0.14/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 15
% 0.14/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 10
% 0.14/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 5200
% 0.14/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 539
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.44 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3760 pages
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.14/0.44 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------