%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SET929+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 : n011.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 02:18:56 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 52 ( 14 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 53 ( 21 ~; 20 |; 8 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 ( 2 sgn 16 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t73_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( set_difference(unordered_pair(X1,X2),X3) = empty_set
<=> ( in(X2,X3)
& in(X1,X3) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t73_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(t37_xboole_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( set_difference(X1,X2) = empty_set
<=> subset(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t37_xboole_1) ).
fof(t38_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( subset(unordered_pair(X1,X2),X3)
<=> ( in(X2,X3)
& in(X1,X3) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t38_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( set_difference(unordered_pair(X1,X2),X3) = empty_set
<=> ( in(X2,X3)
& in(X1,X3) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t73_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X12,X13] :
( ( set_difference(X12,X13) = empty_set
| ~ subset(X12,X13) )
& ( subset(X12,X13)
| set_difference(X12,X13) != empty_set ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t37_xboole_1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ( set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) = empty_set
| in(esk2_0,esk3_0) )
& ( set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) = empty_set
| in(esk1_0,esk3_0) )
& ( ~ in(esk2_0,esk3_0)
| ~ in(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) != empty_set ) ),
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_3])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X9,X10,X11] :
( ( subset(unordered_pair(X9,X10),X11)
| ~ in(X10,X11)
| ~ in(X9,X11) )
& ( ~ subset(unordered_pair(X9,X10),X11)
| in(X10,X11) )
& ( ~ subset(unordered_pair(X9,X10),X11)
| in(X9,X11) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t38_zfmisc_1])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( set_difference(X1,X2) != empty_set
| subset(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) = empty_set
| in(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ subset(unordered_pair(X1,X3),X2)
| in(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) = empty_set
| in(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ subset(unordered_pair(X3,X1),X2)
| in(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(esk2_0,esk3_0)
| ~ in(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) != empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
in(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
in(esk2_0,esk3_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_10]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
set_difference(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) != empty_set,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ subset(X1,X2)
| set_difference(X1,X2) = empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ in(X3,X2)
| ~ in(X1,X2)
| subset(unordered_pair(X1,X3),X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_14]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SET929+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.50 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.50 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.50 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.50 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.50 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.50 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.50 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.50 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:44:10 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.51 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.51 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.58 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.58 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
% 0.24/0.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % sh5l with pid 1094195 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.24/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.24/0.61 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.24/0.61 % Search class: FGHSS-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.61 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1094196 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.24/0.61 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.24/0.61 % Search class: FGHSS-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.61 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.24/0.61
% 0.24/0.61 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.61 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.61 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.24/0.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Initial clauses : 14
% 0.24/0.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 0.24/0.61 % Processed clauses : 34
% 0.24/0.61 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.24/0.61 % ...subsumed : 10
% 0.24/0.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 23
% 0.24/0.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.24/0.61 % Generated clauses : 27
% 0.24/0.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 20
% 0.24/0.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.24/0.61 % Paramodulations : 27
% 0.24/0.61 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Total rewrite steps : 10
% 0.24/0.61 % ...of those cached : 6
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 21
% 0.24/0.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.24/0.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.24/0.61 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.24/0.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 6
% 0.24/0.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 26
% 0.24/0.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 0.24/0.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 8
% 0.24/0.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.24/0.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.24/0.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.24/0.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 922
% 0.24/0.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 143
% 0.24/0.61
% 0.24/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.61 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.24/0.61 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.61 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.24/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3888 pages
% 0.24/0.61
% 0.24/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.61 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.61 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.24/0.61 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.24/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4352 pages
% 0.24/0.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------