%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU294+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 : n018.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 02:24:36 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 33 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 31 ( 12 ~; 9 |; 5 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(cc2_finset_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( finite(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( element(X2,powerset(X1))
=> finite(X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cc2_finset_1) ).
fof(t3_subset,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( element(X1,powerset(X2))
<=> subset(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t3_subset) ).
fof(t13_finset_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( finite(X2)
& subset(X1,X2) )
=> finite(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t13_finset_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X22,X23] :
( finite(X23)
| ~ element(X23,powerset(X22))
| ~ finite(X22) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[cc2_finset_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X121,X122] :
( ( element(X121,powerset(X122))
| ~ subset(X121,X122) )
& ( subset(X121,X122)
| ~ element(X121,powerset(X122)) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t3_subset])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( ( finite(X2)
& subset(X1,X2) )
=> finite(X1) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t13_finset_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ element(X2,powerset(X1))
| ~ finite(X1)
| finite(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ subset(X1,X2)
| element(X1,powerset(X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ finite(esk1_0)
& finite(esk2_0)
& subset(esk1_0,esk2_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_9,plain,
( ~ finite(X2)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| finite(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
subset(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
finite(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ finite(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU294+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:10:29 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.43 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
% 0.19/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 1140164 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.19/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.19/0.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1140167 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.19/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.19/0.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 0.19/0.47
% 0.19/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 395
% 0.19/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 315
% 0.19/0.47 % Initial clauses : 409
% 0.19/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.19/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 407
% 0.19/0.47 % Processed clauses : 199
% 0.19/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.19/0.47 % ...subsumed : 45
% 0.19/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 151
% 0.19/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 11
% 0.19/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 10
% 0.19/0.47 % Generated clauses : 243
% 0.19/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 143
% 0.19/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Paramodulations : 233
% 0.19/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 11
% 0.19/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 129
% 0.19/0.47 % ...of those cached : 105
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 133
% 0.19/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 32
% 0.19/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 17
% 0.19/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 84
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 345
% 0.19/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 1498
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 10
% 0.19/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 337
% 0.19/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 295
% 0.19/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 24
% 0.19/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 117
% 0.19/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.19/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 5
% 0.19/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 26867
% 0.19/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 6946
% 0.19/0.47
% 0.19/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.47 % User time : 0.024 s
% 0.19/0.47 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Total time : 0.033 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4892 pages
% 0.19/0.47
% 0.19/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.47 % User time : 0.031 s
% 0.19/0.47 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Total time : 0.041 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.19/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------