%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET253-6 : 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 : n010.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 02:13:59 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 17 ( 8 unt; 3 nHn; 11 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 2 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 30 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(intersection2,axiom,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',intersection2) ).
cnf(prove_restriction_property4_1,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(restrict(x,y,z),cross_product(y,z)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_restriction_property4_1) ).
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(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(restriction1,axiom,
intersection(X1,cross_product(X2,X3)) = restrict(X1,X2,X3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',restriction1) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(restrict(x,y,z),cross_product(y,z)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_restriction_property4_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_subclass_members2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
( subclass(X1,X2)
| member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X1) ),
not_subclass_members1 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(restrict(x,y,z),cross_product(y,z)),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
intersection(X1,cross_product(X2,X3)) = restrict(X1,X2,X3),
restriction1 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ member(not_subclass_element(X1,X2),X2)
| subclass(X1,X2) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( subclass(intersection(X1,X2),X3)
| member(not_subclass_element(intersection(X1,X2),X3),X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ subclass(intersection(x,cross_product(y,z)),cross_product(y,z)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
subclass(intersection(X1,X2),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET253-6 : 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 : n010.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 05:03:16 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.41 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
% 0.11/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 78064 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 311s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 308s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 304s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 78071 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 113
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses : 113
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 17
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 96
% 0.11/0.45 % Processed clauses : 192
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % ...subsumed : 47
% 0.11/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 144
% 0.11/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.11/0.45 % Generated clauses : 352
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 302
% 0.11/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Paramodulations : 350
% 0.11/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 43
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of those cached : 21
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 136
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 29
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 105
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 204
% 0.11/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 514
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 23
% 0.11/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1399
% 0.11/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 926
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 39
% 0.11/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 72
% 0.11/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 11
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 9466
% 0.11/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 185
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.019 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3948 pages
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.080 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.095 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------