%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU307+1 : 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 : n016.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 02:24:39 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.27s 0.58s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 27 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 52 ( 16 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 43 ( 18 ~; 13 |; 4 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 7 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 2 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 37 ( 1 sgn 23 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t15_pre_topc,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( one_sorted_str(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( element(X2,powerset(the_carrier(X1)))
=> subset_intersection2(the_carrier(X1),X2,cast_as_carrier_subset(X1)) = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t15_pre_topc) ).
fof(d3_pre_topc,axiom,
! [X1] :
( one_sorted_str(X1)
=> cast_as_carrier_subset(X1) = the_carrier(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d3_pre_topc) ).
fof(t3_subset,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( element(X1,powerset(X2))
<=> subset(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t3_subset) ).
fof(reflexivity_r1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : subset(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reflexivity_r1_tarski) ).
fof(t28_xboole_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
=> set_intersection2(X1,X2) = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t28_xboole_1) ).
fof(redefinition_k5_subset_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( element(X3,powerset(X1))
& element(X2,powerset(X1)) )
=> subset_intersection2(X1,X2,X3) = set_intersection2(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',redefinition_k5_subset_1) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( one_sorted_str(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( element(X2,powerset(the_carrier(X1)))
=> subset_intersection2(the_carrier(X1),X2,cast_as_carrier_subset(X1)) = X2 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t15_pre_topc]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( subset_intersection2(the_carrier(esk6_0),esk7_0,cast_as_carrier_subset(esk6_0)) != esk7_0
& element(esk7_0,powerset(the_carrier(esk6_0)))
& one_sorted_str(esk6_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X95] :
( cast_as_carrier_subset(X95) = the_carrier(X95)
| ~ one_sorted_str(X95) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d3_pre_topc])])]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X93,X94] :
( ( element(X93,powerset(X94))
| ~ subset(X93,X94) )
& ( subset(X93,X94)
| ~ element(X93,powerset(X94)) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t3_subset])])]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X81] : subset(X81,X81),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reflexivity_r1_tarski])]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X98,X99] :
( set_intersection2(X98,X99) = X98
| ~ subset(X98,X99) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t28_xboole_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
subset_intersection2(the_carrier(esk6_0),esk7_0,cast_as_carrier_subset(esk6_0)) != esk7_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ one_sorted_str(X1)
| cast_as_carrier_subset(X1) = the_carrier(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
one_sorted_str(esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X85,X86,X87] :
( subset_intersection2(X85,X86,X87) = set_intersection2(X86,X87)
| ~ element(X87,powerset(X85))
| ~ element(X86,powerset(X85)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[redefinition_k5_subset_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ subset(X1,X2)
| element(X1,powerset(X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ subset(X1,X2)
| set_intersection2(X1,X2) = X1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ element(X1,powerset(X2))
| subset(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
subset_intersection2(the_carrier(esk6_0),esk7_0,the_carrier(esk6_0)) != esk7_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ element(X3,powerset(X2))
| ~ element(X1,powerset(X2))
| subset_intersection2(X2,X1,X3) = set_intersection2(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
element(esk7_0,powerset(the_carrier(esk6_0))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
element(X1,powerset(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ element(X1,powerset(X2))
| set_intersection2(X1,X2) = X1 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
set_intersection2(esk7_0,the_carrier(esk6_0)) != esk7_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),c_0_23])]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_22]),c_0_25]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SEU307+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.44 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.44 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:14:38 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.27/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.27/0.52 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: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S 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 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 1730603 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.58 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.58 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4b with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_B07----D_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with pid 1730613 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.58 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.58 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.58 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4b with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.58 % Preprocessing time : 0.004 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 : 59
% 0.27/0.58 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Initial clauses : 118
% 0.27/0.58 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % Initial clauses in saturation : 112
% 0.27/0.58 % Processed clauses : 148
% 0.27/0.58 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.27/0.58 % ...subsumed : 7
% 0.27/0.58 % ...remaining for further processing : 140
% 0.27/0.58 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.27/0.58 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.27/0.58 % Generated clauses : 455
% 0.27/0.58 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 373
% 0.27/0.58 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Paramodulations : 455
% 0.27/0.58 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Total rewrite steps : 82
% 0.27/0.58 % ...of those cached : 70
% 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 : 136
% 0.27/0.58 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 21
% 0.27/0.58 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.27/0.58 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % Non-unit-clauses : 108
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 329
% 0.27/0.58 % ...number of literals in the above : 805
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.27/0.58 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1590
% 0.27/0.58 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1469
% 0.27/0.58 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 6
% 0.27/0.58 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 114
% 0.27/0.58 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % BW rewrite match attempts : 18
% 0.27/0.58 % BW rewrite match successes : 7
% 0.27/0.58 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.58 % Termbank termtop insertions : 9556
% 0.27/0.58 % Search garbage collected termcells : 883
% 0.27/0.58
% 0.27/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.58 % User time : 0.026 s
% 0.27/0.58 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Total time : 0.035 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 3684 pages
% 0.27/0.58
% 0.27/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.58 % User time : 0.118 s
% 0.27/0.58 % System time : 0.027 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Total time : 0.145 s
% 0.27/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.27/0.58 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------