%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU268+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 : 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 02:24:31 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 11.58s 2.02s
% Output : CNFRefutation 11.58s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 32 ( 20 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 104 ( 26 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 33 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 124 ( 52 ~; 55 |; 10 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 16 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 51 ( 3 sgn 25 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d5_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : ordered_pair(X1,X2) = unordered_pair(unordered_pair(X1,X2),singleton(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d5_tarski) ).
fof(t69_enumset1,lemma,
! [X1] : unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t69_enumset1) ).
fof(d1_wellord2,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> ( X2 = inclusion_relation(X1)
<=> ( ! [X3,X4] :
( ( in(X4,X1)
& in(X3,X1) )
=> ( in(ordered_pair(X3,X4),X2)
<=> subset(X3,X4) ) )
& relation_field(X2) = X1 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d1_wellord2) ).
fof(l1_wellord1,lemma,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ( reflexive(X1)
<=> ! [X2] :
( in(X2,relation_field(X1))
=> in(ordered_pair(X2,X2),X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l1_wellord1) ).
fof(dt_k1_wellord2,axiom,
! [X1] : relation(inclusion_relation(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k1_wellord2) ).
fof(reflexivity_r1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : subset(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reflexivity_r1_tarski) ).
fof(t2_wellord2,conjecture,
! [X1] : reflexive(inclusion_relation(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t2_wellord2) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X347,X348] : ordered_pair(X347,X348) = unordered_pair(unordered_pair(X347,X348),singleton(X347)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[d5_tarski]) ).
fof(c_0_8,lemma,
! [X907] : unordered_pair(X907,X907) = singleton(X907),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[t69_enumset1]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X168,X169,X170,X171] :
( ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 = inclusion_relation(X168)
| relation_field(X169) != X168
| subset(esk29_2(X168,X169),esk30_2(X168,X169))
| in(ordered_pair(esk29_2(X168,X169),esk30_2(X168,X169)),X169) )
& ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 = inclusion_relation(X168)
| relation_field(X169) != X168
| ~ subset(esk29_2(X168,X169),esk30_2(X168,X169))
| ~ in(ordered_pair(esk29_2(X168,X169),esk30_2(X168,X169)),X169) )
& ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 = inclusion_relation(X168)
| relation_field(X169) != X168
| in(esk30_2(X168,X169),X168) )
& ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 = inclusion_relation(X168)
| relation_field(X169) != X168
| in(esk29_2(X168,X169),X168) )
& ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 != inclusion_relation(X168)
| ~ in(X171,X168)
| ~ in(X170,X168)
| in(ordered_pair(X170,X171),X169)
| ~ subset(X170,X171) )
& ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 != inclusion_relation(X168)
| ~ in(X171,X168)
| ~ in(X170,X168)
| subset(X170,X171)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X170,X171),X169) )
& ( ~ relation(X169)
| X169 != inclusion_relation(X168)
| relation_field(X169) = X168 ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d1_wellord2])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
ordered_pair(X1,X2) = unordered_pair(unordered_pair(X1,X2),singleton(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,lemma,
unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_12,lemma,
! [X506,X507] :
( ( ~ relation(X506)
| reflexive(X506)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(esk89_1(X506),esk89_1(X506)),X506) )
& ( ~ relation(X506)
| reflexive(X506)
| in(esk89_1(X506),relation_field(X506)) )
& ( ~ relation(X506)
| in(ordered_pair(X507,X507),X506)
| ~ in(X507,relation_field(X506))
| ~ reflexive(X506) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l1_wellord1])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ relation(X3)
| X3 != inclusion_relation(X4)
| ~ in(X2,X4)
| ~ in(X1,X4)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| in(ordered_pair(X1,X2),X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
ordered_pair(X1,X2) = unordered_pair(unordered_pair(X1,X2),unordered_pair(X1,X1)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X417] : relation(inclusion_relation(X417)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[dt_k1_wellord2]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,lemma,
( ~ relation(X1)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(esk89_1(X1),esk89_1(X1)),X1)
| reflexive(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ subset(X1,X2)
| ~ in(X1,X4)
| ~ in(X2,X4)
| ~ relation(X3)
| X3 != inclusion_relation(X4)
| in(unordered_pair(unordered_pair(X1,X2),unordered_pair(X1,X1)),X3) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
relation(inclusion_relation(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
fof(c_0_19,plain,
! [X595] : subset(X595,X595),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reflexivity_r1_tarski])]) ).
fof(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : reflexive(inclusion_relation(X1)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t2_wellord2]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ relation(X1)
| X1 != inclusion_relation(X2)
| relation_field(X1) = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,lemma,
( ~ in(unordered_pair(unordered_pair(esk89_1(X1),esk89_1(X1)),unordered_pair(esk89_1(X1),esk89_1(X1))),X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| reflexive(X1) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( ~ in(X1,X3)
| ~ in(X2,X3)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| in(unordered_pair(unordered_pair(X1,X2),unordered_pair(X1,X1)),inclusion_relation(X3)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]),c_0_18])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
fof(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
~ reflexive(inclusion_relation(esk120_0)),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_20])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,lemma,
( ~ relation(X1)
| reflexive(X1)
| in(esk89_1(X1),relation_field(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
relation_field(inclusion_relation(X1)) = X1,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_21]),c_0_18])]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,lemma,
( ~ in(esk89_1(inclusion_relation(X1)),X1)
| reflexive(inclusion_relation(X1)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),c_0_18]),c_0_24])]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
~ reflexive(inclusion_relation(esk120_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,lemma,
reflexive(inclusion_relation(X1)),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]),c_0_18])]),c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU268+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:05:19 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41 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
% 11.58/2.02 % Version: 3.5.1
% 11.58/2.02 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 11.58/2.02 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2409240 completed with status 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 11.58/2.02 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 11.58/2.02 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 11.58/2.02 % No SInE strategy applied
% 11.58/2.02 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 11.58/2.02 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with pid 2409272 completed with status 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N
% 11.58/2.02 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 11.58/2.02 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 11.58/2.02 % No SInE strategy applied
% 11.58/2.02 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 11.58/2.02 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 11.58/2.02 % Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% 11.58/2.02 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 11.58/2.02
% 11.58/2.02 % Proof found!
% 11.58/2.02 % SZS status Theorem
% 11.58/2.02 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 11.58/2.02 % Parsed axioms : 345
% 11.58/2.02 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Initial clauses : 734
% 11.58/2.02 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 33
% 11.58/2.02 % Initial clauses in saturation : 701
% 11.58/2.02 % Processed clauses : 6903
% 11.58/2.02 % ...of these trivial : 68
% 11.58/2.02 % ...subsumed : 3958
% 11.58/2.02 % ...remaining for further processing : 2877
% 11.58/2.02 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 428
% 11.58/2.02 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Backward-subsumed : 67
% 11.58/2.02 % Backward-rewritten : 55
% 11.58/2.02 % Generated clauses : 53416
% 11.58/2.02 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 49437
% 11.58/2.02 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 65
% 11.58/2.02 % Paramodulations : 52966
% 11.58/2.02 % Factorizations : 32
% 11.58/2.02 % NegExts : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Equation resolutions : 436
% 11.58/2.02 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Total rewrite steps : 10261
% 11.58/2.02 % ...of those cached : 9457
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional check models : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 11.58/2.02 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 11.58/2.02 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 11.58/2.02 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 11.58/2.02 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 11.58/2.02 % Current number of processed clauses : 2013
% 11.58/2.02 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 148
% 11.58/2.02 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 11.58/2.02 % Negative unit clauses : 304
% 11.58/2.02 % Non-unit-clauses : 1557
% 11.58/2.02 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 43503
% 11.58/2.02 % ...number of literals in the above : 163925
% 11.58/2.02 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Current number of archived clauses : 761
% 11.58/2.02 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 545032
% 11.58/2.02 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 271521
% 11.58/2.02 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2078
% 11.58/2.02 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 104435
% 11.58/2.02 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % BW rewrite match attempts : 147
% 11.58/2.02 % BW rewrite match successes : 93
% 11.58/2.02 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Condensation successes : 0
% 11.58/2.02 % Termbank termtop insertions : 764152
% 11.58/2.02 % Search garbage collected termcells : 12865
% 11.58/2.02
% 11.58/2.02 % -------------------------------------------------
% 11.58/2.02 % User time : 1.497 s
% 11.58/2.02 % System time : 0.046 s
% 11.58/2.02 % Total time : 1.543 s
% 11.58/2.02 % Maximum resident set size: 6064 pages
% 11.58/2.02
% 11.58/2.02 % -------------------------------------------------
% 11.58/2.02 % User time : 7.272 s
% 11.58/2.02 % System time : 0.253 s
% 11.58/2.02 % Total time : 7.525 s
% 11.58/2.02 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 11.58/2.02 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------