%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV239-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 0.15s 0.48s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 7 unt; 3 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 34 ( 0 equ; 15 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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_Oanalz__analzD__dest_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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Set_OsubsetI_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/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_Oanalz__subset__cong_0) ).
cnf(cls_Set_Osubset__refl_0,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,X1,tc_set(X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',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,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_8,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_9,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_10,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_11,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_12,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(X1,X2,X3),X2,X3)
| c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X1)),X2,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_Message_Oanalz(c_Message_Oanalz(X1)),X2,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Oanalz(X1),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,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_10 ).
cnf(c_0_15,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_11 ).
cnf(c_0_16,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_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,X1,tc_set(X2)),
cls_Set_Osubset__refl_0 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV239-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:38:07 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.44 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
% 0.15/0.48 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.48 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % new_bool_3 with pid 1860067 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.48 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.48 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.48 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1860070 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.48 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.48 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.48 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.48 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.48 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.48 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.15/0.48 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.15/0.48 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.15/0.48 % Processed clauses : 11
% 0.15/0.48 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % ...remaining for further processing : 11
% 0.15/0.48 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Generated clauses : 9
% 0.15/0.48 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 7
% 0.15/0.48 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Paramodulations : 9
% 0.15/0.48 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.15/0.48 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.15/0.48 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.48 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.48 % Non-unit-clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.15/0.48 % ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 16
% 0.15/0.48 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 16
% 0.15/0.48 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.15/0.48 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.15/0.48 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Termbank termtop insertions : 472
% 0.15/0.48 % Search garbage collected termcells : 14
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.48 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.48 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.48 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.48 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.48 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------