%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET779-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.5.0.
% 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 02:15:22 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Satisfiable 0.08s 0.43s
% Output : Saturation 0.08s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : ERROR: Analysing output (Could not find formula named c_0_12ERROR: Could not build tree for root c_0_31ERROR: MakeTreeStats fails)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
( member(h(X1,X2,X3),X2)
| intersection(X1,X2,X3)
| member(h(X1,X2,X3),X3) ),
intersection_axiom2,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
( member(h(X1,X2,X3),X1)
| intersection(X1,X2,X3)
| member(h(X1,X2,X3),X3) ),
intersection_axiom1,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ member(h(X1,X2,X3),X1)
| ~ member(h(X1,X2,X3),X2)
| ~ member(h(X1,X2,X3),X3)
| intersection(X1,X2,X3) ),
c_0_12,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( member(h(X1,X2,X2),X2)
| intersection(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ member(member_of_1_not_of_2(X1,X2),X2)
| subset(X1,X2) ),
c_0_14,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_20,axiom,
( member(member_of_1_not_of_2(X1,X2),X1)
| subset(X1,X2) ),
subsets_axiom1,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( member(h(X1,X2,X1),X1)
| intersection(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( ~ member(h(X1,X2,X2),X1)
| intersection(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_17]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( ~ subset(X2,X1)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| equal_sets(X2,X1) ),
c_0_18,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
( ~ member(h(X1,X2,X1),X2)
| intersection(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_21]),c_0_21]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( ~ member(X4,X1)
| ~ member(X4,X2)
| ~ intersection(X1,X2,X3)
| member(X4,X3) ),
c_0_22,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
( ~ member(X4,X3)
| ~ intersection(X1,X2,X3)
| member(X4,X1) ),
c_0_23,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
( ~ member(X4,X3)
| ~ intersection(X1,X2,X3)
| member(X4,X2) ),
c_0_24,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_35,plain,
( ~ subset(X2,X3)
| ~ member(X1,X2)
| member(X1,X3) ),
c_0_25,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_36,plain,
( ~ equal_sets(X1,X2)
| subset(X1,X2) ),
c_0_26,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
( ~ equal_sets(X1,X2)
| subset(X2,X1) ),
c_0_27,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_38,plain,
intersection(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_17]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_39,plain,
equal_sets(X1,X1),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]),c_0_30])]),
[final] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET779-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.36 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:37:40 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.41 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
% 0.08/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.08/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 126859 completed with status 1
% 0.08/0.43 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.08/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.43 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.43 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % new_bool_3 with pid 126869 completed with status 1
% 0.08/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.08/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.43 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.43 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.08/0.43 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.08/0.43
% 0.08/0.43 % No proof found!
% 0.08/0.43 % SZS status Satisfiable
% 0.08/0.43 % SZS output start Saturation
% See solution above
% 0.08/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 12
% 0.08/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Initial clauses : 12
% 0.08/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.08/0.43 % Processed clauses : 36
% 0.08/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.08/0.43 % ...subsumed : 4
% 0.08/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 31
% 0.08/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Generated clauses : 22
% 0.08/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 12
% 0.08/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.08/0.43 % Paramodulations : 18
% 0.08/0.43 % Factorizations : 4
% 0.08/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 6
% 0.08/0.43 % ...of those cached : 4
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 19
% 0.08/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.08/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 16
% 0.08/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 12
% 0.08/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 54
% 0.08/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 44
% 0.08/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 6
% 0.08/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.08/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 10
% 0.08/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.08/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 769
% 0.08/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 34
% 0.08/0.43
% 0.08/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.43 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.08/0.43 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.08/0.43 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.08/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.08/0.43
% 0.08/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.43 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.08/0.43 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.08/0.43 % Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.08/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.08/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------