↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SET974+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 02:15:52 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.22s 0.85s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   21 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   53 (   2 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   61 (  29   ~;  17   |;  13   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   13 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   4 con; 0-5 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   66 (  11 sgn  31   !;   2   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t4_xboole_0,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( ~ ( disjoint(X1,X2)
          & ? [X3] : in(X3,set_intersection2(X1,X2)) )
      & ~ ( ! [X3] : ~ in(X3,set_intersection2(X1,X2))
          & ~ disjoint(X1,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t4_xboole_0) ).

fof(t104_zfmisc_1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4,X5] :
      ~ ( ! [X6,X7] :
            ~ ( in(X7,set_intersection2(X3,X5))
              & in(X6,set_intersection2(X2,X4))
              & X1 = ordered_pair(X6,X7) )
        & in(X1,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X2,X3),cartesian_product2(X4,X5))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t104_zfmisc_1) ).

fof(t127_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( ( disjoint(X3,X4)
        | disjoint(X1,X2) )
     => disjoint(cartesian_product2(X1,X3),cartesian_product2(X2,X4)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t127_zfmisc_1) ).

fof(c_0_3,plain,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( ~ ( disjoint(X1,X2)
          & ? [X3] : in(X3,set_intersection2(X1,X2)) )
      & ~ ( ! [X3] : ~ in(X3,set_intersection2(X1,X2))
          & ~ disjoint(X1,X2) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[t4_xboole_0]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X14,X15,X17,X18,X19] :
      ( ( ~ disjoint(X17,X18)
        | ~ in(X19,set_intersection2(X17,X18)) )
      & ( in(esk5_2(X14,X15),set_intersection2(X14,X15))
        | disjoint(X14,X15) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X20,X21,X22,X23,X24] :
      ( ( ~ in(X20,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X21,X22),cartesian_product2(X23,X24)))
        | in(esk7_5(X20,X21,X22,X23,X24),set_intersection2(X22,X24)) )
      & ( ~ in(X20,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X21,X22),cartesian_product2(X23,X24)))
        | in(esk6_5(X20,X21,X22,X23,X24),set_intersection2(X21,X23)) )
      & ( ~ in(X20,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X21,X22),cartesian_product2(X23,X24)))
        | X20 = ordered_pair(esk6_5(X20,X21,X22,X23,X24),esk7_5(X20,X21,X22,X23,X24)) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t104_zfmisc_1])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
        ( ( disjoint(X3,X4)
          | disjoint(X1,X2) )
       => disjoint(cartesian_product2(X1,X3),cartesian_product2(X2,X4)) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t127_zfmisc_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ disjoint(X2,X3)
    | ~ in(X1,set_intersection2(X2,X3)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ in(X1,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X2,X3),cartesian_product2(X4,X5)))
    | in(esk6_5(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5),set_intersection2(X2,X4)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ disjoint(cartesian_product2(esk1_0,esk3_0),cartesian_product2(esk2_0,esk4_0))
    & ( disjoint(esk3_0,esk4_0)
      | disjoint(esk1_0,esk2_0) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ in(X3,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X1,X4),cartesian_product2(X2,X5)))
    | ~ disjoint(X1,X2) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( in(esk5_2(X1,X2),set_intersection2(X1,X2))
    | disjoint(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ in(X1,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X2,X3),cartesian_product2(X4,X5)))
    | in(esk7_5(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5),set_intersection2(X3,X5)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ~ disjoint(cartesian_product2(esk1_0,esk3_0),cartesian_product2(esk2_0,esk4_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ disjoint(X1,X3)
    | disjoint(cartesian_product2(X1,X2),cartesian_product2(X3,X4)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ in(X3,set_intersection2(cartesian_product2(X4,X1),cartesian_product2(X5,X2)))
    | ~ disjoint(X1,X2) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ( disjoint(esk3_0,esk4_0)
    | disjoint(esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ~ disjoint(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ disjoint(X2,X4)
    | disjoint(cartesian_product2(X1,X2),cartesian_product2(X3,X4)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    disjoint(esk3_0,esk4_0),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_18]),c_0_19])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04  % Problem  : SET974+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.71  % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.71  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.71  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.71  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.71  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.71  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.71  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.71  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:45:54 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.71  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.71  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.78  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.78  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
% 0.22/0.85  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.22/0.85  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.85  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % sh5l with pid 270438 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.22/0.85  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.85  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.22/0.85  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.22/0.85  % Search class: FGHSM-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.85  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % SubtermCWHack with pid 270445 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.22/0.85  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.85  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.22/0.85  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.22/0.85  % Search class: FGHSM-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.85  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.85  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.85  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.85  
% 0.22/0.85  % Proof found!
% 0.22/0.85  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/0.85  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.85  % Parsed axioms                        : 12
% 0.22/0.85  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Initial clauses                      : 16
% 0.22/0.85  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 16
% 0.22/0.85  % Processed clauses                    : 91
% 0.22/0.85  % ...of these trivial                  : 6
% 0.22/0.85  % ...subsumed                          : 39
% 0.22/0.85  % ...remaining for further processing  : 46
% 0.22/0.85  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Generated clauses                    : 165
% 0.22/0.85  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 147
% 0.22/0.85  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Paramodulations                      : 163
% 0.22/0.85  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Total rewrite steps                  : 18
% 0.22/0.85  % ...of those cached                   : 8
% 0.22/0.85  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.22/0.85  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.22/0.85  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.22/0.85  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.22/0.85  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.22/0.85  % Current number of processed clauses  : 44
% 0.22/0.85  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 9
% 0.22/0.85  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.22/0.85  %    Negative unit clauses             : 5
% 0.22/0.85  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 28
% 0.22/0.85  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 70
% 0.22/0.85  % ...number of literals in the above   : 114
% 0.22/0.85  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 0.22/0.85  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 168
% 0.22/0.85  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 165
% 0.22/0.85  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 39
% 0.22/0.85  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24
% 0.22/0.85  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.22/0.85  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.22/0.85  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.22/0.85  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2379
% 0.22/0.85  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 174
% 0.22/0.85  
% 0.22/0.85  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.85  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.22/0.85  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.22/0.85  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.22/0.85  % Maximum resident set size: 3592 pages
% 0.22/0.85  
% 0.22/0.85  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.85  % User time                : 0.010 s
% 0.22/0.85  % System time              : 0.010 s
% 0.22/0.85  % Total time               : 0.020 s
% 0.22/0.85  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.22/0.85  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------