%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET125-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 02:13:40 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.28s 0.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.28s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 32 ( 19 unt; 3 nHn; 20 RR)
% Number of literals : 51 ( 7 equ; 23 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 46 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(subclass_members,axiom,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',subclass_members) ).
cnf(prove_set_builder_alternate_defn3_2,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,set_builder(y,z)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_set_builder_alternate_defn3_2) ).
cnf(definition_of_set_builder,axiom,
union(singleton(X1),X2) = set_builder(X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',definition_of_set_builder) ).
cnf(singleton_set,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',singleton_set) ).
cnf(class_elements_are_sets,axiom,
subclass(X1,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',class_elements_are_sets) ).
cnf(union,axiom,
complement(intersection(complement(X1),complement(X2))) = union(X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',union) ).
cnf(complement2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',complement2) ).
cnf(prove_set_builder_alternate_defn3_1,negated_conjecture,
member(x,z),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_set_builder_alternate_defn3_1) ).
cnf(intersection2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection2) ).
cnf(complement1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',complement1) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[subclass_members]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,set_builder(y,z)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_set_builder_alternate_defn3_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
union(singleton(X1),X2) = set_builder(X1,X2),
definition_of_set_builder ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
singleton_set ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ member(X3,X1)
| ~ subclass(X1,X2)
| member(X3,X2) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
subclass(X1,universal_class),
class_elements_are_sets ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,set_builder(y,z)),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
union(unordered_pair(X1,X1),X2) = set_builder(X1,X2),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
complement(intersection(complement(X1),complement(X2))) = union(X1,X2),
union ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[complement2]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
member(x,z),
prove_set_builder_alternate_defn3_1 ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection2]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,complement(intersection(complement(unordered_pair(y,y)),complement(z)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
c_0_19 ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
member(x,universal_class),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[complement1]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_22 ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
member(x,intersection(complement(unordered_pair(y,y)),complement(z))),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_25])]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
c_0_26 ).
cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
member(x,complement(z)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]),c_0_21])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SET125-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.42 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.42 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.42 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:57:21 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.49 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
% 0.28/0.59 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.28/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 1415420 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.28/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.28/0.59 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.28/0.59 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.59 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1415427 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.28/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.28/0.59 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.28/0.59 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.59 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.28/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.59 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.28/0.59
% 0.28/0.59 % Proof found!
% 0.28/0.59 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.28/0.59 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.28/0.59 % Parsed axioms : 94
% 0.28/0.59 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Initial clauses : 94
% 0.28/0.59 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 16
% 0.28/0.59 % Initial clauses in saturation : 78
% 0.28/0.59 % Processed clauses : 73
% 0.28/0.59 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % ...subsumed : 8
% 0.28/0.59 % ...remaining for further processing : 65
% 0.28/0.59 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.28/0.59 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.28/0.59 % Generated clauses : 75
% 0.28/0.59 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 58
% 0.28/0.59 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.28/0.59 % Paramodulations : 73
% 0.28/0.59 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % NegExts : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.28/0.59 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Total rewrite steps : 12
% 0.28/0.59 % ...of those cached : 4
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.59 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.59 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.59 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.59 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.59 % Current number of processed clauses : 62
% 0.28/0.59 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 21
% 0.28/0.59 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.28/0.59 % Non-unit-clauses : 39
% 0.28/0.59 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 63
% 0.28/0.59 % ...number of literals in the above : 152
% 0.28/0.59 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Current number of archived clauses : 17
% 0.28/0.59 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 248
% 0.28/0.59 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 162
% 0.28/0.59 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 7
% 0.28/0.59 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 70
% 0.28/0.59 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.28/0.59 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.28/0.59 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.28/0.59 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4732
% 0.28/0.59 % Search garbage collected termcells : 156
% 0.28/0.59
% 0.28/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.59 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.28/0.59 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.28/0.59 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.28/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 3720 pages
% 0.28/0.59
% 0.28/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.59 % User time : 0.051 s
% 0.28/0.59 % System time : 0.028 s
% 0.28/0.59 % Total time : 0.079 s
% 0.28/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.28/0.59 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------