%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET850-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n002.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 02:15:35 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.21s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 20 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X1,tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_lessequals(X4,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_x,v_y,tc_set(tc_set(t_a))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(v_x,c_Zorn_Osucc(v_S,v_y,t_a),tc_set(tc_set(t_a))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_Zorn_OAbrial__axiom1_0,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,c_Zorn_Osucc(X2,X1,X3),tc_set(tc_set(X3))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Zorn_OAbrial__axiom1_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X1,tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_lessequals(X4,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X1,tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_lessequals(X4,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_x,v_y,tc_set(tc_set(t_a))),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(v_x,c_Zorn_Osucc(v_S,v_y,t_a),tc_set(tc_set(t_a))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_y,X1,tc_set(tc_set(t_a)))
| c_lessequals(v_x,X1,tc_set(tc_set(t_a))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,c_Zorn_Osucc(X2,X1,X3),tc_set(tc_set(X3))),
cls_Zorn_OAbrial__axiom1_0 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(v_x,c_Zorn_Osucc(v_S,v_y,t_a),tc_set(tc_set(t_a))),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_x,c_Zorn_Osucc(X1,v_y,t_a),tc_set(tc_set(t_a))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SET850-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n002.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 05:44:16 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.21/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.21/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % new_bool_1 with pid 2548247 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.21/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2548254 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.21/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.21/0.46
% 0.21/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.21/0.46 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.21/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 1361
% 0.21/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 977
% 0.21/0.46 % Initial clauses : 384
% 0.21/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 384
% 0.21/0.46 % Processed clauses : 460
% 0.21/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % ...subsumed : 75
% 0.21/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 385
% 0.21/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.21/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.21/0.46 % Generated clauses : 142
% 0.21/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 82
% 0.21/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Paramodulations : 140
% 0.21/0.46 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.21/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 55
% 0.21/0.46 % ...of those cached : 28
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 380
% 0.21/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 37
% 0.21/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.21/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 339
% 0.21/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 6
% 0.21/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 12
% 0.21/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.21/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 29199
% 0.21/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 29164
% 0.21/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 74
% 0.21/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 453
% 0.21/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.21/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.21/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 15438
% 0.21/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2483
% 0.21/0.46
% 0.21/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.46 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.21/0.46 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.21/0.46 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.21/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4808 pages
% 0.21/0.46
% 0.21/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.46 % User time : 0.034 s
% 0.21/0.46 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.21/0.46 % Total time : 0.043 s
% 0.21/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.21/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------