%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU230+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 : 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 02:28:38 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.27s 0.58s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 58 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 20 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 66 ( 25 ~; 29 |; 8 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 1 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 39 ( 2 sgn 25 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d2_xboole_0,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( X3 = set_union2(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X4] :
( in(X4,X3)
<=> ( in(X4,X2)
| in(X4,X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d2_xboole_0) ).
fof(t10_ordinal1,conjecture,
! [X1] : in(X1,succ(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t10_ordinal1) ).
fof(d1_ordinal1,axiom,
! [X1] : succ(X1) = set_union2(X1,singleton(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d1_ordinal1) ).
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(c_0_4,plain,
! [X15,X16,X17,X18,X19,X20,X21,X22] :
( ( X22 = set_union2(X20,X21)
| in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X21)
| in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X20)
| in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X22) )
& ( X22 = set_union2(X20,X21)
| ~ in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X22)
| ~ in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X21) )
& ( X22 = set_union2(X20,X21)
| ~ in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X22)
| ~ in(esk3_3(X20,X21,X22),X20) )
& ( X17 != set_union2(X15,X16)
| in(X19,X17)
| ~ in(X19,X16) )
& ( X17 != set_union2(X15,X16)
| in(X19,X17)
| ~ in(X19,X15) )
& ( X17 != set_union2(X15,X16)
| in(X18,X16)
| in(X18,X15)
| ~ in(X18,X17) ) ),
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)],[d2_xboole_0])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : in(X1,succ(X1)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t10_ordinal1]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( X3 != set_union2(X4,X2)
| ~ in(X1,X2)
| in(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X30] : succ(X30) = set_union2(X30,singleton(X30)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[d1_ordinal1]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X8,X9,X10,X11,X12,X13] :
( ( X13 = singleton(X12)
| esk2_2(X12,X13) = X12
| in(esk2_2(X12,X13),X13) )
& ( X13 = singleton(X12)
| esk2_2(X12,X13) != X12
| ~ in(esk2_2(X12,X13),X13) )
& ( X9 != singleton(X8)
| in(X11,X9)
| X11 != X8 )
& ( X9 != singleton(X8)
| X10 = X8
| ~ in(X10,X9) ) ),
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_9,negated_conjecture,
~ in(esk1_0,succ(esk1_0)),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ in(X1,X3)
| in(X1,set_union2(X2,X3)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
succ(X1) = set_union2(X1,singleton(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( X3 != singleton(X2)
| X1 != X2
| in(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ in(esk1_0,succ(esk1_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ in(X1,singleton(X2))
| in(X1,succ(X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
in(X1,singleton(X1)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[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
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SEU230+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.45 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.45 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.45 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.45 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.45 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.45 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:00:49 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.52 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
% 0.27/0.58 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % sh5l with pid 2402316 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.27/0.58 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.27/0.58 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2402324 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.27/0.58 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.27/0.58 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.27/0.58
% 0.27/0.58 % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.58 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.27/0.58 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/0.58 % Parsed axioms : 34
% 0.27/0.58 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.27/0.58 % Initial clauses : 56
% 0.27/0.58 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.27/0.58 % Initial clauses in saturation : 54
% 0.27/0.58 % Processed clauses : 130
% 0.27/0.58 % ...of these trivial : 4
% 0.27/0.58 % ...subsumed : 44
% 0.27/0.58 % ...remaining for further processing : 82
% 0.27/0.58 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.27/0.58 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % Generated clauses : 158
% 0.27/0.58 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 123
% 0.27/0.58 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.27/0.58 % Paramodulations : 147
% 0.27/0.58 % Factorizations : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Total rewrite steps : 38
% 0.27/0.58 % ...of those cached : 24
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.58 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.58 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.58 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.58 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of processed clauses : 70
% 0.27/0.58 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 27
% 0.27/0.58 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.27/0.58 % Negative unit clauses : 15
% 0.27/0.58 % Non-unit-clauses : 27
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 46
% 0.27/0.58 % ...number of literals in the above : 139
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.27/0.58 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 167
% 0.27/0.58 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 114
% 0.27/0.58 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 19
% 0.27/0.58 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 188
% 0.27/0.58 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % BW rewrite match attempts : 14
% 0.27/0.58 % BW rewrite match successes : 13
% 0.27/0.58 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3600
% 0.27/0.58 % Search garbage collected termcells : 516
% 0.27/0.58
% 0.27/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.58 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.27/0.58 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 3652 pages
% 0.27/0.58
% 0.27/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.58 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.27/0.58 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.27/0.58 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------