%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SET153-6 : 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 : 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 02:16:42 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.40s 0.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.40s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 5 unt; 4 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 33 ( 9 equ; 16 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 : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 33 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(intersection2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection2) ).
cnf(complement1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',complement1) ).
cnf(regularity1,axiom,
( member(regular(X1),X1)
| X1 = null_class ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',regularity1) ).
cnf(intersection1,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection1) ).
cnf(prove_intersection_with_complement_1,negated_conjecture,
intersection(complement(x),x) != null_class,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_intersection_with_complement_1) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[complement1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
( member(regular(X1),X1)
| X1 = null_class ),
regularity1 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| ~ member(X1,complement(X2)) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( member(regular(intersection(X1,X2)),X2)
| intersection(X1,X2) = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X2) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
intersection(complement(x),x) != null_class,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_intersection_with_complement_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ member(regular(intersection(X1,X2)),complement(X2))
| intersection(X1,X2) = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( member(regular(intersection(X1,X2)),X1)
| intersection(X1,X2) = null_class ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
intersection(complement(x),x) != null_class,
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
intersection(complement(X1),X1) = null_class,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SET153-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:56:57 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.40/0.49 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.40/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.40/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 891484 completed with status 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.40/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.40/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.40/0.49 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.40/0.49 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.40/0.49 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % new_bool_3 with pid 891493 completed with status 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.40/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.40/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.40/0.49 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.40/0.49 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.40/0.49 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.49 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.40/0.49 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.40/0.49
% 0.40/0.49 % Proof found!
% 0.40/0.49 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.40/0.49 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.40/0.49 % Parsed axioms : 113
% 0.40/0.49 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Initial clauses : 113
% 0.40/0.49 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 17
% 0.40/0.49 % Initial clauses in saturation : 96
% 0.40/0.49 % Processed clauses : 350
% 0.40/0.49 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.40/0.49 % ...subsumed : 15
% 0.40/0.49 % ...remaining for further processing : 333
% 0.40/0.49 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.40/0.49 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Backward-subsumed : 13
% 0.40/0.49 % Backward-rewritten : 7
% 0.40/0.49 % Generated clauses : 900
% 0.40/0.49 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 734
% 0.40/0.49 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Paramodulations : 896
% 0.40/0.49 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % NegExts : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.40/0.49 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Total rewrite steps : 183
% 0.40/0.49 % ...of those cached : 130
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.49 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.49 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.49 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.49 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.49 % Current number of processed clauses : 214
% 0.40/0.49 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 66
% 0.40/0.49 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.40/0.49 % Negative unit clauses : 38
% 0.40/0.49 % Non-unit-clauses : 109
% 0.40/0.49 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 575
% 0.40/0.49 % ...number of literals in the above : 998
% 0.40/0.49 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Current number of archived clauses : 132
% 0.40/0.49 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3057
% 0.40/0.49 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1693
% 0.40/0.49 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 18
% 0.40/0.49 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 349
% 0.40/0.49 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % BW rewrite match attempts : 40
% 0.40/0.49 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.40/0.49 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.40/0.49 % Termbank termtop insertions : 23168
% 0.40/0.49 % Search garbage collected termcells : 185
% 0.40/0.49
% 0.40/0.49 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.40/0.49 % User time : 0.038 s
% 0.40/0.49 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.40/0.49 % Total time : 0.047 s
% 0.40/0.49 % Maximum resident set size: 3736 pages
% 0.40/0.49
% 0.40/0.49 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.40/0.49 % User time : 0.154 s
% 0.40/0.49 % System time : 0.031 s
% 0.40/0.49 % Total time : 0.185 s
% 0.40/0.49 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.40/0.49 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------