%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU160+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 02:24:03 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 5.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 43 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 38 ( 13 ~; 18 |; 4 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 ( 2 sgn 13 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t39_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,singleton(X2))
<=> ( X1 = singleton(X2)
| X1 = empty_set ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t39_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(l4_zfmisc_1,lemma,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,singleton(X2))
<=> ( X1 = singleton(X2)
| X1 = empty_set ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l4_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(reflexivity_r1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : subset(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reflexivity_r1_tarski) ).
fof(t2_xboole_1,lemma,
! [X1] : subset(empty_set,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t2_xboole_1) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,singleton(X2))
<=> ( X1 = singleton(X2)
| X1 = empty_set ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t39_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,lemma,
! [X24,X25] :
( ( subset(X24,singleton(X25))
| X24 != singleton(X25) )
& ( subset(X24,singleton(X25))
| X24 != empty_set )
& ( X24 = singleton(X25)
| X24 = empty_set
| ~ subset(X24,singleton(X25)) ) ),
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_6,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0 = singleton(esk2_0)
| esk1_0 = empty_set
| subset(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) )
& ( ~ subset(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0))
| esk1_0 != singleton(esk2_0) )
& ( ~ subset(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0))
| esk1_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_4])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,lemma,
( ~ subset(X1,singleton(X2))
| X1 = singleton(X2)
| X1 = empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 = singleton(esk2_0)
| esk1_0 = empty_set
| subset(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X52] : subset(X52,X52),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reflexivity_r1_tarski])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ subset(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0))
| esk1_0 != singleton(esk2_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 = empty_set
| singleton(esk2_0) = esk1_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_13,lemma,
! [X38] : subset(empty_set,X38),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[t2_xboole_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( ~ subset(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0))
| esk1_0 != empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = empty_set,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,lemma,
subset(empty_set,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU160+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/5.38 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/5.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/5.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/5.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/5.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/5.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/5.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/5.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:56:28 UTC 2026
% 0.11/5.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/5.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/5.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/5.43 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
% 0.14/5.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/5.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/5.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % new_bool_1 with pid 1509353 completed with status 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/5.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/5.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/5.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/5.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/5.46 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1509356 completed with status 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/5.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/5.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/5.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/5.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/5.46 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/5.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/5.46
% 0.14/5.46 % Proof found!
% 0.14/5.46 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/5.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/5.46 % Parsed axioms : 90
% 0.14/5.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 30
% 0.14/5.46 % Initial clauses : 97
% 0.14/5.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 97
% 0.14/5.46 % Processed clauses : 134
% 0.14/5.46 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.14/5.46 % ...subsumed : 50
% 0.14/5.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 79
% 0.14/5.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 9
% 0.14/5.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.14/5.46 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.14/5.46 % Generated clauses : 215
% 0.14/5.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 134
% 0.14/5.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Paramodulations : 207
% 0.14/5.46 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Equation resolutions : 9
% 0.14/5.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Total rewrite steps : 80
% 0.14/5.46 % ...of those cached : 56
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 67
% 0.14/5.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 22
% 0.14/5.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.14/5.46 % Negative unit clauses : 9
% 0.14/5.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 34
% 0.14/5.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 96
% 0.14/5.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 240
% 0.14/5.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.14/5.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 145
% 0.14/5.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 137
% 0.14/5.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 26
% 0.14/5.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8
% 0.14/5.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 23
% 0.14/5.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 18
% 0.14/5.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/5.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 7122
% 0.14/5.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1500
% 0.14/5.46
% 0.14/5.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/5.46 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.14/5.46 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/5.46 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.14/5.46 % Maximum resident set size: 3964 pages
% 0.14/5.46
% 0.14/5.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/5.46 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.14/5.46 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.14/5.46 % Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.14/5.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/5.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------