%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET119-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n019.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 0.13s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 7 unt; 6 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 25 ( 11 equ; 9 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 9 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(corollary_1_to_cartesian_product,axiom,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',corollary_1_to_cartesian_product) ).
cnf(existence_of_1st_and_2nd_2,axiom,
( first(X1) = X1
| member(ordered_pair(first(X1),second(X1)),cross_product(universal_class,universal_class)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',existence_of_1st_and_2nd_2) ).
cnf(existence_of_1st_and_2nd_4,axiom,
( first(X1) = X1
| ordered_pair(first(X1),second(X1)) = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',existence_of_1st_and_2nd_4) ).
cnf(prove_corollary_1_to_OP_determines_components1_2,negated_conjecture,
first(ordered_pair(x,y)) != ordered_pair(x,y),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_corollary_1_to_OP_determines_components1_2) ).
cnf(prove_corollary_1_to_OP_determines_components1_1,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_corollary_1_to_OP_determines_components1_1) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[corollary_1_to_cartesian_product]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
( first(X1) = X1
| member(ordered_pair(first(X1),second(X1)),cross_product(universal_class,universal_class)) ),
existence_of_1st_and_2nd_2 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
( first(X1) = X1
| ordered_pair(first(X1),second(X1)) = X1 ),
existence_of_1st_and_2nd_4 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
first(ordered_pair(x,y)) != ordered_pair(x,y),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_corollary_1_to_OP_determines_components1_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( member(X1,cross_product(universal_class,universal_class))
| first(X1) = X1 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_corollary_1_to_OP_determines_components1_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
first(ordered_pair(x,y)) != ordered_pair(x,y),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( member(X1,universal_class)
| first(ordered_pair(X1,X2)) = ordered_pair(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SET119-7 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:55:20 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.39 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
% 0.13/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % new_bool_1 with pid 1729333 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1729336 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 167
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 95
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses : 72
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 72
% 0.13/0.45 % Processed clauses : 643
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 26
% 0.13/0.45 % ...subsumed : 418
% 0.13/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 199
% 0.13/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 18
% 0.13/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 7
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Generated clauses : 4171
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2831
% 0.13/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Paramodulations : 4150
% 0.13/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 21
% 0.13/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 1475
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of those cached : 1306
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 188
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 40
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 142
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2238
% 0.13/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 7044
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.13/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2778
% 0.13/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2617
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 385
% 0.13/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13
% 0.13/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 29
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 13
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 39254
% 0.13/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 526
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.025 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.029 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3760 pages
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.028 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.038 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------