%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU148+3 : 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 : n003.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 02:28:15 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 52 ( 32 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 53 ( 22 ~; 20 |; 6 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 ( 1 sgn 20 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t6_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(singleton(X1),singleton(X2))
=> X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t6_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(l1_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1] : singleton(X1) != empty_set,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l1_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(d1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = singleton(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> X3 = X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d1_tarski) ).
fof(l4_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,singleton(X2))
<=> ( X1 = singleton(X2)
| X1 = empty_set ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l4_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( subset(singleton(X1),singleton(X2))
=> X1 = X2 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t6_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X1] : singleton(X1) != empty_set,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[l1_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X9,X10,X11,X12,X13,X14] :
( ( X14 = singleton(X13)
| esk3_2(X13,X14) = X13
| in(esk3_2(X13,X14),X14) )
& ( X14 = singleton(X13)
| esk3_2(X13,X14) != X13
| ~ in(esk3_2(X13,X14),X14) )
& ( X10 != singleton(X9)
| in(X12,X10)
| X12 != X9 )
& ( X10 != singleton(X9)
| X11 = X9
| ~ in(X11,X10) ) ),
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_7,plain,
! [X6,X7] :
( ( subset(X6,singleton(X7))
| X6 != singleton(X7) )
& ( subset(X6,singleton(X7))
| X6 != empty_set )
& ( X6 = singleton(X7)
| X6 = empty_set
| ~ subset(X6,singleton(X7)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l4_zfmisc_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 != esk2_0
& subset(singleton(esk1_0),singleton(esk2_0)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X16] : singleton(X16) != empty_set,
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( X3 != singleton(X2)
| X1 != X2
| in(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ subset(X1,singleton(X2))
| X1 = singleton(X2)
| X1 = empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
subset(singleton(esk1_0),singleton(esk2_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
singleton(X1) != empty_set,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( X2 != singleton(X3)
| ~ in(X1,X2)
| X1 = X3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
in(X1,singleton(X1)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
singleton(esk2_0) = singleton(esk1_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ in(X1,singleton(X2))
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
in(esk2_0,singleton(esk1_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU148+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.57 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.57 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.57 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.57 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.57 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.57 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.57 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.57 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:54:31 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.57 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.57 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.61 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.61 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
% 0.14/0.64 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % sh5l with pid 3550620 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.14/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.64 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.64 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.64 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3550627 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.64 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.64 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.64 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.64 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.64
% 0.14/0.64 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.64 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.64 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.64 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.14/0.64 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Initial clauses : 15
% 0.14/0.64 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.14/0.64 % Processed clauses : 20
% 0.14/0.64 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.14/0.64 % ...remaining for further processing : 19
% 0.14/0.64 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 5
% 0.14/0.64 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.14/0.64 % Generated clauses : 14
% 0.14/0.64 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11
% 0.14/0.64 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Paramodulations : 10
% 0.14/0.64 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Equation resolutions : 5
% 0.14/0.64 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.14/0.64 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.64 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.64 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.64 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.64 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.64 % Current number of processed clauses : 14
% 0.14/0.64 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.14/0.64 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.14/0.64 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.64 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5
% 0.14/0.64 % ...number of literals in the above : 12
% 0.14/0.64 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.14/0.64 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.14/0.64 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.14/0.64 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.14/0.64 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.64 % Termbank termtop insertions : 784
% 0.14/0.64 % Search garbage collected termcells : 201
% 0.14/0.64
% 0.14/0.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.64 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.64 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.64 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.64 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.14/0.64
% 0.14/0.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.64 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.14/0.64 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.64 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.14/0.64 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.64 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------