%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU155+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 : n004.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 02:24:01 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 58 ( 8 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 20 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 65 ( 24 ~; 26 |; 9 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 2 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 36 ( 0 sgn 23 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l50_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( in(X1,X2)
=> subset(X1,union(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l50_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(d4_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = union(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> ? [X4] :
( in(X4,X1)
& in(X3,X4) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d4_tarski) ).
fof(d3_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X1)
=> in(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d3_tarski) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( in(X1,X2)
=> subset(X1,union(X2)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l50_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X68,X69,X70,X72,X73,X74,X75,X77] :
( ( X75 = union(X74)
| in(esk9_2(X74,X75),X75)
| in(esk10_2(X74,X75),X74) )
& ( X75 = union(X74)
| in(esk9_2(X74,X75),X75)
| in(esk9_2(X74,X75),esk10_2(X74,X75)) )
& ( X75 = union(X74)
| ~ in(X77,X74)
| ~ in(esk9_2(X74,X75),X77)
| ~ in(esk9_2(X74,X75),X75) )
& ( X69 != union(X68)
| in(X72,X69)
| ~ in(X73,X68)
| ~ in(X72,X73) )
& ( X69 != union(X68)
| ~ in(X70,X69)
| in(esk8_3(X68,X69,X70),X68) )
& ( X69 != union(X68)
| ~ in(X70,X69)
| in(X70,esk8_3(X68,X69,X70)) ) ),
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)],[d4_tarski])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ subset(esk12_0,union(esk13_0))
& in(esk12_0,esk13_0) ),
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,
! [X53,X54,X55,X56,X57] :
( ( subset(X56,X57)
| ~ in(esk6_2(X56,X57),X57) )
& ( subset(X56,X57)
| in(esk6_2(X56,X57),X56) )
& ( in(X55,X54)
| ~ in(X55,X53)
| ~ subset(X53,X54) ) ),
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)],[d3_tarski])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( X4 != union(X3)
| ~ in(X2,X3)
| ~ in(X1,X2)
| in(X1,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(esk12_0,union(esk13_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ in(esk6_2(X1,X2),X2)
| subset(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ in(X1,X3)
| ~ in(X3,X2)
| in(X1,union(X2)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
in(esk12_0,esk13_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( subset(X1,X2)
| in(esk6_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ in(esk6_2(esk12_0,union(esk13_0)),union(esk13_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(X1,esk12_0)
| in(X1,union(esk13_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
in(esk6_2(esk12_0,union(esk13_0)),esk12_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SEU155+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.36 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:53:35 UTC 2026
% 0.14/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.40 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
% 0.14/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2388119 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.46 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with pid 2388129 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.46 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.46 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.14/0.46
% 0.14/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.46 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 80
% 0.14/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Initial clauses : 130
% 0.14/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 10
% 0.14/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 120
% 0.14/0.46 % Processed clauses : 524
% 0.14/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 9
% 0.14/0.46 % ...subsumed : 228
% 0.14/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 287
% 0.14/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 36
% 0.14/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.14/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.14/0.46 % Generated clauses : 829
% 0.14/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 650
% 0.14/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Paramodulations : 793
% 0.14/0.46 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 39
% 0.14/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 291
% 0.14/0.46 % ...of those cached : 208
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 150
% 0.14/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 36
% 0.14/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% 0.14/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 40
% 0.14/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 71
% 0.14/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 351
% 0.14/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 669
% 0.14/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 114
% 0.14/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 879
% 0.14/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 667
% 0.14/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 54
% 0.14/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 421
% 0.14/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 62
% 0.14/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 41
% 0.14/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 13537
% 0.14/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1878
% 0.14/0.46
% 0.14/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.46 % User time : 0.029 s
% 0.14/0.46 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.46 % Total time : 0.035 s
% 0.14/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 3952 pages
% 0.14/0.46
% 0.14/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.46 % User time : 0.123 s
% 0.14/0.46 % System time : 0.023 s
% 0.14/0.46 % Total time : 0.145 s
% 0.14/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------