%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET900+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 : n016.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 02:15:42 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 43 ( 33 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 64 ( 35 ~; 11 |; 18 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 6 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 0 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t41_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
~ ( ! [X3] :
~ ( X3 != X2
& in(X3,X1) )
& X1 != empty_set
& X1 != singleton(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t41_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(l45_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
~ ( ! [X3] :
~ ( X3 != X2
& in(X3,X1) )
& X1 != empty_set
& X1 != singleton(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l45_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
~ ( ! [X3] :
~ ( X3 != X2
& in(X3,X1) )
& X1 != empty_set
& X1 != singleton(X2) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t41_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
~ ( ! [X3] :
~ ( X3 != X2
& in(X3,X1) )
& X1 != empty_set
& X1 != singleton(X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
~ ( ! [X3] :
~ ( X3 != X2
& in(X3,X1) )
& X1 != empty_set
& X1 != singleton(X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[l45_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X6] :
( ( X6 = esk2_0
| ~ in(X6,esk1_0) )
& esk1_0 != empty_set
& esk1_0 != singleton(esk2_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X9,X10] :
( ( X9 = empty_set
| X9 = singleton(X10)
| esk3_2(X9,X10) != X10 )
& ( X9 = empty_set
| X9 = singleton(X10)
| in(esk3_2(X9,X10),X9) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(X1,esk1_0)
| X1 = esk2_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( X1 = empty_set
| X1 = singleton(X2)
| in(esk3_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != empty_set,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( esk3_2(X1,X2) != X2
| X1 = empty_set
| X1 = singleton(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( singleton(X1) = esk1_0
| esk3_2(esk1_0,X1) = esk2_0 ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != singleton(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_9])]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SET900+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.43 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:48:08 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.49 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
% 0.25/0.52 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % new_bool_3 with pid 1684670 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.25/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.52 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.52 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.52 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1684675 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.52 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.52 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.52 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.52 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.52
% 0.25/0.52 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.52 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/0.52 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.52 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.25/0.52 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.25/0.52 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.25/0.52 % Processed clauses : 10
% 0.25/0.52 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.25/0.52 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.25/0.52 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Generated clauses : 5
% 0.25/0.52 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.25/0.52 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Paramodulations : 4
% 0.25/0.52 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.25/0.52 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.52 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.52 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.52 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.52 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.52 % Current number of processed clauses : 10
% 0.25/0.52 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.25/0.52 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.25/0.52 % Non-unit-clauses : 5
% 0.25/0.52 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.25/0.52 % ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.25/0.52 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.25/0.52 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.25/0.52 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.52 % Termbank termtop insertions : 481
% 0.25/0.52 % Search garbage collected termcells : 107
% 0.25/0.52
% 0.25/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.52 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.52 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.52 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.25/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.25/0.52
% 0.25/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.52 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.25/0.52 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.25/0.52 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.25/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.25/0.52 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------