%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET411-6 : 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 : n005.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 02:14:10 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.26s 0.57s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 23 ( 12 unt; 0 nHn; 21 RR)
% Number of literals : 37 ( 2 equ; 17 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; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 ( 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(compose_can_define_singleton,axiom,
intersection(complement(compose(element_relation,complement(identity_relation))),element_relation) = singleton_relation,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-1.ax',compose_can_define_singleton) ).
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(element_relation2,axiom,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),element_relation)
| member(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',element_relation2) ).
cnf(prove_compose_condition_for_singleton_membership1_1,negated_conjecture,
member(ordered_pair(x,y),singleton_relation),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_compose_condition_for_singleton_membership1_1) ).
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_compose_condition_for_singleton_membership1_2,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_compose_condition_for_singleton_membership1_2) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[intersection2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
intersection(complement(compose(element_relation,complement(identity_relation))),element_relation) = singleton_relation,
compose_can_define_singleton ).
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,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),element_relation)
| member(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[element_relation2]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ member(X1,singleton_relation)
| member(X1,element_relation) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
member(ordered_pair(x,y),singleton_relation),
prove_compose_condition_for_singleton_membership1_1 ).
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,plain,
( ~ member(ordered_pair(X1,X2),element_relation)
| member(X1,X2) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
member(ordered_pair(x,y),element_relation),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_compose_condition_for_singleton_membership1_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,universal_class) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
member(x,y),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
~ member(x,universal_class),
c_0_18 ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SET411-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.43 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:15:02 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.26/0.51 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.26/0.51 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
% 0.26/0.57 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.26/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % new_bool_3 with pid 2625553 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.26/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.26/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.26/0.57 % Search class: FGHSS-FFSS21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.57 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2625556 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.26/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.26/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.26/0.57 % Search class: FGHSS-FFSS21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.57 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.57 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.57
% 0.26/0.57 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.57 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.26/0.57 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.57 % Parsed axioms : 114
% 0.26/0.57 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 91
% 0.26/0.57 % Initial clauses : 23
% 0.26/0.57 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Initial clauses in saturation : 23
% 0.26/0.57 % Processed clauses : 27
% 0.26/0.57 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.26/0.57 % ...remaining for further processing : 26
% 0.26/0.57 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.26/0.57 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Generated clauses : 25
% 0.26/0.57 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 18
% 0.26/0.57 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Paramodulations : 23
% 0.26/0.57 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.26/0.57 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.26/0.57 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.57 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.57 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.57 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.57 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.57 % Current number of processed clauses : 24
% 0.26/0.57 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.26/0.57 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.26/0.57 % Non-unit-clauses : 14
% 0.26/0.57 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 14
% 0.26/0.57 % ...number of literals in the above : 36
% 0.26/0.57 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 27
% 0.26/0.57 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 20
% 0.26/0.57 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.26/0.57 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.26/0.57 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.57 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1624
% 0.26/0.57 % Search garbage collected termcells : 469
% 0.26/0.57
% 0.26/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.57 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.26/0.57 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.26/0.57 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.26/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 3744 pages
% 0.26/0.57
% 0.26/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.57 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.26/0.57 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.26/0.57 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.26/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.26/0.57 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------