%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU143+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 02:23:57 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.27s 0.54s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 15 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 39 ( 21 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 38 ( 20 ~; 12 |; 4 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 2 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = singleton(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> X3 = X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d1_tarski) ).
fof(l1_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1] : singleton(X1) != empty_set,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l1_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(t7_boole,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
~ ( empty(X2)
& in(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t7_boole) ).
fof(t69_enumset1,lemma,
! [X1] : unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t69_enumset1) ).
fof(fc1_xboole_0,axiom,
empty(empty_set),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fc1_xboole_0) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X20,X21,X22,X23,X24,X25] :
( ( X25 = singleton(X24)
| esk3_2(X24,X25) = X24
| in(esk3_2(X24,X25),X25) )
& ( X25 = singleton(X24)
| esk3_2(X24,X25) != X24
| ~ in(esk3_2(X24,X25),X25) )
& ( X21 != singleton(X20)
| in(X23,X21)
| X23 != X20 )
& ( X21 != singleton(X20)
| X22 = X20
| ~ in(X22,X21) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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)],[d1_tarski])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : singleton(X1) != empty_set,
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l1_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X66,X67] :
( ~ empty(X67)
| ~ in(X66,X67) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t7_boole])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( X3 != singleton(X2)
| X1 != X2
| in(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : singleton(X1) != empty_set,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ empty(X2)
| ~ in(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
in(X1,singleton(X1)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,lemma,
! [X27] : unordered_pair(X27,X27) = singleton(X27),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[t69_enumset1]) ).
fof(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
singleton(esk1_0) = empty_set,
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
~ empty(singleton(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,lemma,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
singleton(esk1_0) = empty_set,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,lemma,
~ empty(unordered_pair(X1,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk1_0) = empty_set,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
empty(empty_set),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[fc1_xboole_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SEU143+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.44 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.45 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:55:16 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.51 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.27/0.51 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
% 0.27/0.54 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.27/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % new_bool_3 with pid 2572438 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.27/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.27/0.54 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.27/0.54 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.54 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2572441 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.27/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.27/0.54 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.27/0.54 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.54 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.54 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.27/0.54
% 0.27/0.54 % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.54 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.27/0.54 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/0.54 % Parsed axioms : 64
% 0.27/0.54 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 16
% 0.27/0.54 % Initial clauses : 79
% 0.27/0.54 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Initial clauses in saturation : 79
% 0.27/0.54 % Processed clauses : 37
% 0.27/0.54 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.27/0.54 % ...remaining for further processing : 36
% 0.27/0.54 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 5
% 0.27/0.54 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.27/0.54 % Generated clauses : 28
% 0.27/0.54 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 13
% 0.27/0.54 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Paramodulations : 24
% 0.27/0.54 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Equation resolutions : 5
% 0.27/0.54 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Total rewrite steps : 15
% 0.27/0.54 % ...of those cached : 8
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.54 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.54 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.54 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.54 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.54 % Current number of processed clauses : 30
% 0.27/0.54 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 0.27/0.54 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.27/0.54 % Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.27/0.54 % Non-unit-clauses : 8
% 0.27/0.54 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 55
% 0.27/0.54 % ...number of literals in the above : 144
% 0.27/0.54 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.27/0.54 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.27/0.54 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.27/0.54 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.27/0.54 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.27/0.54 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.27/0.54 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.27/0.54 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.54 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4709
% 0.27/0.54 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1252
% 0.27/0.54
% 0.27/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.54 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.27/0.54 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.27/0.54 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.27/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 3932 pages
% 0.27/0.54
% 0.27/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.54 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.27/0.54 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.27/0.54 % Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.27/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.27/0.54 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------