%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU172+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 : n013.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 02:24:07 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 : 16 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 53 ( 12 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 20 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 59 ( 22 ~; 19 |; 11 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 16 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 2 sgn 26 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d4_xboole_0,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( X3 = set_difference(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X4] :
( in(X4,X3)
<=> ( ~ in(X4,X2)
& in(X4,X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d4_xboole_0) ).
fof(t54_subset_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( element(X3,powerset(X1))
=> ~ ( in(X2,X3)
& in(X2,subset_complement(X1,X3)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t54_subset_1) ).
fof(d5_subset_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( element(X2,powerset(X1))
=> subset_complement(X1,X2) = set_difference(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d5_subset_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( X3 = set_difference(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X4] :
( in(X4,X3)
<=> ( ~ in(X4,X2)
& in(X4,X1) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[d4_xboole_0]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( element(X3,powerset(X1))
=> ~ ( in(X2,X3)
& in(X2,subset_complement(X1,X3)) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t54_subset_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X100,X101,X102,X103,X104,X105,X106,X107] :
( ( X107 = set_difference(X105,X106)
| in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X107)
| ~ in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X106) )
& ( X107 = set_difference(X105,X106)
| in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X107)
| in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X105) )
& ( X107 = set_difference(X105,X106)
| in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X106)
| ~ in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X105)
| ~ in(esk16_3(X105,X106,X107),X107) )
& ( X102 != set_difference(X100,X101)
| in(X104,X102)
| in(X104,X101)
| ~ in(X104,X100) )
& ( X102 != set_difference(X100,X101)
| ~ in(X103,X102)
| ~ in(X103,X101) )
& ( X102 != set_difference(X100,X101)
| ~ in(X103,X102)
| in(X103,X100) ) ),
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)],[c_0_3])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( in(esk27_0,esk28_0)
& in(esk27_0,subset_complement(esk26_0,esk28_0))
& element(esk28_0,powerset(esk26_0)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X109,X110] :
( subset_complement(X109,X110) = set_difference(X109,X110)
| ~ element(X110,powerset(X109)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d5_subset_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( X3 != set_difference(X4,X2)
| ~ in(X1,X3)
| ~ in(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
in(esk27_0,subset_complement(esk26_0,esk28_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ element(X1,powerset(X2))
| subset_complement(X2,X1) = set_difference(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
element(esk28_0,powerset(esk26_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ in(X1,X3)
| ~ in(X1,set_difference(X2,X3)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
in(esk27_0,set_difference(esk26_0,esk28_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
in(esk27_0,esk28_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU172+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.35 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:54:06 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.35 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 74110 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-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 12 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--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 74119 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Result found by G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 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-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 12 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--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 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 : 112
% 0.14/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Initial clauses : 195
% 0.14/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 14
% 0.14/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 181
% 0.14/0.46 % Processed clauses : 410
% 0.14/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 4
% 0.14/0.46 % ...subsumed : 29
% 0.14/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 377
% 0.14/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 41
% 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 : 1934
% 0.14/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1745
% 0.14/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.14/0.47 % Paramodulations : 1878
% 0.14/0.47 % Factorizations : 14
% 0.14/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 46
% 0.14/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 210
% 0.14/0.47 % ...of those cached : 153
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 184
% 0.14/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 34
% 0.14/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.14/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 19
% 0.14/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 127
% 0.14/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1663
% 0.14/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 4835
% 0.14/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 165
% 0.14/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4604
% 0.14/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3294
% 0.14/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 18
% 0.14/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 677
% 0.14/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 6
% 0.14/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 53
% 0.14/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 41
% 0.14/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 32674
% 0.14/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2784
% 0.14/0.47
% 0.14/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.47 % User time : 0.039 s
% 0.14/0.47 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.47 % Total time : 0.045 s
% 0.14/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4244 pages
% 0.14/0.47
% 0.14/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.47 % User time : 0.140 s
% 0.14/0.47 % System time : 0.032 s
% 0.14/0.47 % Total time : 0.172 s
% 0.14/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------