%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV239-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 02:54:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 5.65s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 8 unt; 3 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 35 ( 0 equ; 16 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 40 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Message_Oanalz__analzD__dest_0,axiom,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X2)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV004-0.ax',cls_Message_Oanalz__analzD__dest_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_Message_Oanalz__subset__cong_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X3),c_Message_Oanalz(X4),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X3,X1,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X4,X2,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_Oanalz__subset__cong_0) ).
cnf(cls_Set_OsubsetI_1,axiom,
( ~ c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(X1,X2,X3),X2,X3)
| c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/MSC001-0.ax',cls_Set_OsubsetI_1) ).
cnf(cls_Set_OsubsetI_0,axiom,
( c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(X1,X2,X3),X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/MSC001-0.ax',cls_Set_OsubsetI_0) ).
cnf(cls_Set_Osubset__refl_0,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,X1,tc_set(X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/MSC001-0.ax',cls_Set_Osubset__refl_0) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X2)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Message_Oanalz__analzD__dest_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X3),c_Message_Oanalz(X4),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X3,X1,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X4,X2,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Message_Oanalz__subset__cong_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(X1,X2,X3),X2,X3)
| c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Set_OsubsetI_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X2)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
( c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(X1,X2,X3),X1,X3) ),
cls_Set_OsubsetI_0 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X3),c_Message_Oanalz(X4),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X3,X1,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X4,X2,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,X1,tc_set(X2)),
cls_Set_Osubset__refl_0 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(X1,X2,X3),X2,X3)
| c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X1)),X2,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Oanalz(X1),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X1)),X2,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(v_G),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X1)),c_Message_Oanalz(X1),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV239-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/5.37 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.09/5.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/5.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/5.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/5.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/5.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/5.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/5.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:37:33 UTC 2026
% 0.09/5.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/5.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/5.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/5.41 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/5.65 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/5.65 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/5.65 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1470174 completed with status 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.14/5.65 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/5.65 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/5.65 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/5.65 % Search class: FGHSM-SSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/5.65 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C12_02_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S070I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C47_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1470180 completed with status 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/5.65 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/5.65 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/5.65 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/5.65 % Search class: FGHSM-SSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/5.65 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/5.65 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/5.65 % Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/5.65
% 0.14/5.65 % Proof found!
% 0.14/5.65 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/5.65 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/5.65 % Parsed axioms : 1400
% 0.14/5.65 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Initial clauses : 1400
% 0.14/5.65 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.14/5.65 % Initial clauses in saturation : 1399
% 0.14/5.65 % Processed clauses : 5160
% 0.14/5.65 % ...of these trivial : 492
% 0.14/5.65 % ...subsumed : 2832
% 0.14/5.65 % ...remaining for further processing : 1836
% 0.14/5.65 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 31
% 0.14/5.65 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.14/5.65 % Backward-rewritten : 94
% 0.14/5.65 % Generated clauses : 11956
% 0.14/5.65 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 9694
% 0.14/5.65 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Paramodulations : 11884
% 0.14/5.65 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Equation resolutions : 72
% 0.14/5.65 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Total rewrite steps : 7890
% 0.14/5.65 % ...of those cached : 7362
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.65 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.65 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.65 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.65 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/5.65 % Current number of processed clauses : 1740
% 0.14/5.65 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 394
% 0.14/5.65 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Negative unit clauses : 33
% 0.14/5.65 % Non-unit-clauses : 1313
% 0.14/5.65 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5643
% 0.14/5.65 % ...number of literals in the above : 9214
% 0.14/5.65 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Current number of archived clauses : 96
% 0.14/5.65 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1381255
% 0.14/5.65 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1342060
% 0.14/5.65 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2782
% 0.14/5.65 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 12770
% 0.14/5.65 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % BW rewrite match attempts : 873
% 0.14/5.65 % BW rewrite match successes : 63
% 0.14/5.65 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/5.65 % Termbank termtop insertions : 180364
% 0.14/5.65 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1692
% 0.14/5.65
% 0.14/5.65 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/5.65 % User time : 0.184 s
% 0.14/5.65 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.14/5.65 % Total time : 0.198 s
% 0.14/5.65 % Maximum resident set size: 5920 pages
% 0.14/5.65
% 0.14/5.65 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/5.65 % User time : 0.893 s
% 0.14/5.65 % System time : 0.056 s
% 0.14/5.65 % Total time : 0.949 s
% 0.14/5.65 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.14/5.65 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------