%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET911+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n008.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 02:15:44 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 15 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 11 ( 5 ~; 2 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t52_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( in(X1,X2)
=> set_intersection2(X2,singleton(X1)) = singleton(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t52_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(l32_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( in(X1,X2)
=> set_intersection2(X2,singleton(X1)) = singleton(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l32_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( in(X1,X2)
=> set_intersection2(X2,singleton(X1)) = singleton(X1) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t52_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X12,X13] :
( set_intersection2(X13,singleton(X12)) = singleton(X12)
| ~ in(X12,X13) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l32_zfmisc_1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( set_intersection2(esk4_0,singleton(esk3_0)) != singleton(esk3_0)
& in(esk3_0,esk4_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ in(X1,X2)
| set_intersection2(X2,singleton(X1)) = singleton(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
in(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
set_intersection2(esk4_0,singleton(esk3_0)) != singleton(esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SET911+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:43:54 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 265222 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.42 % Search class: FHHSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % new_bool_1 with pid 265230 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.42 % Search class: FHHSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.15/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.15/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.15/0.42 % Processed clauses : 16
% 0.15/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 16
% 0.15/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Generated clauses : 2
% 0.15/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.15/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 0.15/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.15/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.15/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.15/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.15/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 364
% 0.15/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 60
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42 % User time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.42 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------