%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU429+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n002.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 02:29:24 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 2.69s 7.77s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.69s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 37 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 39 ( 15 ~; 6 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 11 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn 24 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t28_relset_2,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ~ v1_xboole_0(X1)
=> ! [X2,X3] :
( m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X1)))
=> ! [X4] :
( m2_relset_1(X4,X1,X2)
=> m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X2))) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t28_relset_2) ).
fof(s8_domain_1__e1_38__relset_2,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( m2_relset_1(X4,X1,X2)
& m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X1)))
& ~ v1_xboole_0(X1) )
=> m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X2))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s8_domain_1__e1_38__relset_2) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ~ v1_xboole_0(X1)
=> ! [X2,X3] :
( m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X1)))
=> ! [X4] :
( m2_relset_1(X4,X1,X2)
=> m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X2))) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t28_relset_2]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ~ v1_xboole_0(X1)
=> ! [X2,X3] :
( m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X1)))
=> ! [X4] :
( m2_relset_1(X4,X1,X2)
=> m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X2))) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( m2_relset_1(X4,X1,X2)
& m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X1)))
& ~ v1_xboole_0(X1) )
=> m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X2))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[s8_domain_1__e1_38__relset_2]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(esk2_0)))
& m2_relset_1(esk4_0,esk1_0,esk2_0)
& m1_subset_1(esk3_0,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(esk1_0)))
& ~ v1_xboole_0(esk1_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X50,X51,X52,X53] :
( m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X50,X51,X52,X53),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X51)))
| ~ m2_relset_1(X53,X50,X51)
| ~ m1_subset_1(X52,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X50)))
| v1_xboole_0(X50) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(esk2_0))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ m2_relset_1(X3,X1,X4)
| ~ m1_subset_1(X2,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X1)))
| m1_subset_1(a_4_1_relset_2(X1,X4,X2,X3),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X4)))
| v1_xboole_0(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
m2_relset_1(esk4_0,esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
m1_subset_1(esk3_0,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(esk1_0))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ v1_xboole_0(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SEU429+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/5.46 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.19/5.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/5.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/5.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/5.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/5.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/5.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/5.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:31:14 UTC 2026
% 0.19/5.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/5.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/5.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/5.53 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
% 2.69/7.77 % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.69/7.77 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.69/7.77 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting G-E--_211_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_S0Y with 299s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % new_bool_1 with pid 2635939 completed with status 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 2.69/7.77 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.69/7.77 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 2.69/7.77 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 2.69/7.77 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 2.69/7.77 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 3 cores with 897 seconds (897 total)
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 81s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_1 with 90s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 74s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 2635947 completed with status 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Result found by G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 2.69/7.77 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.69/7.77 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 2.69/7.77 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 2.69/7.77 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 2.69/7.77 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 3 cores with 897 seconds (897 total)
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 81s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting new_bool_1 with 90s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 74s (1) cores
% 2.69/7.77 % Preprocessing time : 0.037 s
% 2.69/7.77 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 2.69/7.77
% 2.69/7.77 % Proof found!
% 2.69/7.77 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.69/7.77 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.69/7.77 % Parsed axioms : 19101
% 2.69/7.77 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 18855
% 2.69/7.77 % Initial clauses : 375
% 2.69/7.77 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 2.69/7.77 % Initial clauses in saturation : 368
% 2.69/7.77 % Processed clauses : 537
% 2.69/7.77 % ...of these trivial : 4
% 2.69/7.77 % ...subsumed : 21
% 2.69/7.77 % ...remaining for further processing : 512
% 2.69/7.77 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 33
% 2.69/7.77 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 2.69/7.77 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 2.69/7.77 % Generated clauses : 552
% 2.69/7.77 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 503
% 2.69/7.77 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 2.69/7.77 % Paramodulations : 519
% 2.69/7.77 % Factorizations : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % NegExts : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Equation resolutions : 36
% 2.69/7.77 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Total rewrite steps : 86
% 2.69/7.77 % ...of those cached : 47
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional check models : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 2.69/7.77 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 2.69/7.77 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 2.69/7.77 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 2.69/7.77 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 2.69/7.77 % Current number of processed clauses : 144
% 2.69/7.77 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 42
% 2.69/7.77 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 2.69/7.77 % Non-unit-clauses : 95
% 2.69/7.77 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 657
% 2.69/7.77 % ...number of literals in the above : 1925
% 2.69/7.77 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Current number of archived clauses : 338
% 2.69/7.77 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 30366
% 2.69/7.77 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9047
% 2.69/7.77 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 23
% 2.69/7.77 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 870
% 2.69/7.77 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 2.69/7.77 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 2.69/7.77 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Condensation successes : 0
% 2.69/7.77 % Termbank termtop insertions : 586870
% 2.69/7.77 % Search garbage collected termcells : 187885
% 2.69/7.77
% 2.69/7.77 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.69/7.77 % User time : 0.319 s
% 2.69/7.77 % System time : 0.134 s
% 2.69/7.77 % Total time : 0.453 s
% 2.69/7.77 % Maximum resident set size: 40840 pages
% 2.69/7.77
% 2.69/7.77 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.69/7.77 % User time : 2.124 s
% 2.69/7.77 % System time : 0.317 s
% 2.69/7.77 % Total time : 2.440 s
% 2.69/7.77 % Maximum resident set size: 32768 pages
% 2.69/7.77 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------