%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU368+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 : n005.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 02:24:52 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 31 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 70 ( 32 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 62 ( 23 ~; 19 |; 15 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 10 ( 8 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 49 ( 6 sgn 24 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(redefinition_m2_relset_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( relation_of2_as_subset(X3,X1,X2)
<=> relation_of2(X3,X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',redefinition_m2_relset_1) ).
fof(dt_k1_yellow_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( relation_of2_as_subset(inclusion_order(X1),X1,X1)
& v1_partfun1(inclusion_order(X1),X1,X1)
& transitive(inclusion_order(X1))
& antisymmetric(inclusion_order(X1))
& reflexive(inclusion_order(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k1_yellow_1) ).
fof(free_g1_orders_2,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation_of2(X2,X1,X1)
=> ! [X3,X4] :
( rel_str_of(X1,X2) = rel_str_of(X3,X4)
=> ( X2 = X4
& X1 = X3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',free_g1_orders_2) ).
fof(d1_yellow_1,axiom,
! [X1] : incl_POSet(X1) = rel_str_of(X1,inclusion_order(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d1_yellow_1) ).
fof(t1_yellow_1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( the_InternalRel(incl_POSet(X1)) = inclusion_order(X1)
& the_carrier(incl_POSet(X1)) = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t1_yellow_1) ).
fof(abstractness_v1_orders_2,axiom,
! [X1] :
( rel_str(X1)
=> ( strict_rel_str(X1)
=> X1 = rel_str_of(the_carrier(X1),the_InternalRel(X1)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',abstractness_v1_orders_2) ).
fof(dt_k2_yellow_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( rel_str(incl_POSet(X1))
& strict_rel_str(incl_POSet(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k2_yellow_1) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X22,X23,X24] :
( ( relation_of2_as_subset(X24,X22,X23)
| ~ relation_of2(X24,X22,X23) )
& ( relation_of2(X24,X22,X23)
| ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X24,X22,X23) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[redefinition_m2_relset_1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X7] :
( relation_of2_as_subset(inclusion_order(X7),X7,X7)
& v1_partfun1(inclusion_order(X7),X7,X7)
& transitive(inclusion_order(X7))
& antisymmetric(inclusion_order(X7))
& reflexive(inclusion_order(X7)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[dt_k1_yellow_1]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X32,X33,X34,X35] :
( ( ~ relation_of2(X33,X32,X32)
| rel_str_of(X32,X33) != rel_str_of(X34,X35)
| X33 = X35 )
& ( ~ relation_of2(X33,X32,X32)
| rel_str_of(X32,X33) != rel_str_of(X34,X35)
| X32 = X34 ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[free_g1_orders_2])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X2,X3)
| relation_of2(X1,X2,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
relation_of2_as_subset(inclusion_order(X1),X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X8] : incl_POSet(X8) = rel_str_of(X8,inclusion_order(X8)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[d1_yellow_1]) ).
fof(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( the_InternalRel(incl_POSet(X1)) = inclusion_order(X1)
& the_carrier(incl_POSet(X1)) = X1 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t1_yellow_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ relation_of2(X1,X3,X3)
| rel_str_of(X3,X1) != rel_str_of(X4,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
relation_of2(inclusion_order(X1),X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
incl_POSet(X1) = rel_str_of(X1,inclusion_order(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
fof(c_0_17,plain,
! [X9] :
( X9 = rel_str_of(the_carrier(X9),the_InternalRel(X9))
| ~ strict_rel_str(X9)
| ~ rel_str(X9) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[abstractness_v1_orders_2])])]) ).
fof(c_0_18,plain,
! [X13] :
( rel_str(incl_POSet(X13))
& strict_rel_str(incl_POSet(X13)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[dt_k2_yellow_1]) ).
fof(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( the_InternalRel(incl_POSet(esk1_0)) != inclusion_order(esk1_0)
| the_carrier(incl_POSet(esk1_0)) != esk1_0 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_13])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( incl_POSet(X1) != rel_str_of(X3,X2)
| inclusion_order(X1) = X2 ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ strict_rel_str(X1)
| ~ rel_str(X1)
| X1 = rel_str_of(the_carrier(X1),the_InternalRel(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
strict_rel_str(incl_POSet(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
rel_str(incl_POSet(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ relation_of2(X3,X1,X1)
| rel_str_of(X1,X3) != rel_str_of(X2,X4)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
( the_InternalRel(incl_POSet(esk1_0)) != inclusion_order(esk1_0)
| the_carrier(incl_POSet(esk1_0)) != esk1_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
the_InternalRel(incl_POSet(X1)) = inclusion_order(X1),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21])]),c_0_22]),c_0_23])]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( incl_POSet(X1) != rel_str_of(X2,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_15]),c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
the_carrier(incl_POSet(esk1_0)) != esk1_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26])]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
the_carrier(incl_POSet(X1)) = X1,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_21])]),c_0_22]),c_0_23])]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SEU368+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.45 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.45 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.45 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.45 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.45 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.45 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:16:17 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.52 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
% 0.24/0.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % sh5l with pid 2732697 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.24/0.56 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.24/0.56 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2732698 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.24/0.56 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.24/0.56 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.56
% 0.24/0.56 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.56 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.56 % Parsed axioms : 53
% 0.24/0.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 9
% 0.24/0.56 % Initial clauses : 78
% 0.24/0.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 78
% 0.24/0.56 % Processed clauses : 150
% 0.24/0.56 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.24/0.56 % ...subsumed : 19
% 0.24/0.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 126
% 0.24/0.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.24/0.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.24/0.56 % Backward-rewritten : 11
% 0.24/0.56 % Generated clauses : 147
% 0.24/0.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 112
% 0.24/0.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.24/0.56 % Paramodulations : 145
% 0.24/0.56 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.24/0.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Total rewrite steps : 86
% 0.24/0.56 % ...of those cached : 61
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 113
% 0.24/0.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 44
% 0.24/0.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.24/0.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 61
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 39
% 0.24/0.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 135
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 13
% 0.24/0.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1041
% 0.24/0.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 746
% 0.24/0.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 21
% 0.24/0.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 117
% 0.24/0.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 8
% 0.24/0.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 5
% 0.24/0.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 5761
% 0.24/0.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 576
% 0.24/0.56
% 0.24/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.56 % User time : 0.019 s
% 0.24/0.56 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Total time : 0.021 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3940 pages
% 0.24/0.56
% 0.24/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.56 % User time : 0.022 s
% 0.24/0.56 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Total time : 0.030 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/0.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------