%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV242-1 : 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 : n011.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 02:54:03 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.70s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 23 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 19 RR)
% Number of literals : 39 ( 0 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X1,tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_lessequals(X4,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_H,c_Message_Oanalz(v_H_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_Message_Oanalz__mono_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_Oanalz__mono_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| ~ c_lessequals(v_H,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(v_G_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_Set_OUn__upper2_0,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,c_union(X2,X1,X3),tc_set(X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Set_OUn__upper2_0) ).
cnf(cls_Set_OUn__upper1_0,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,c_union(X1,X2,X3),tc_set(X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Set_OUn__upper1_0) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X1,tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_lessequals(X4,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X1,tc_set(X3))
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))
| c_lessequals(X4,X2,tc_set(X3)) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_H,c_Message_Oanalz(v_H_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Message_Oanalz__mono_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| ~ c_lessequals(v_H,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(v_H_H),X1,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(v_H,X1,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(v_G_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| ~ c_lessequals(v_H,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_H_H,X1,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(v_H,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,c_union(X2,X1,X3),tc_set(X3)),
cls_Set_OUn__upper2_0 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G_H),X1,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(v_G,X1,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G_H,v_H_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_G_H,X1,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
| c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oanalz(X1),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
c_lessequals(X1,c_union(X1,X2,X3),tc_set(X3)),
cls_Set_OUn__upper1_0 ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWV242-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.58 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.58 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.58 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.58 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.58 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.58 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.58 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.58 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:35:56 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.58 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.58 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.63 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.63 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
% 0.15/0.70 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.70 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.70 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % new_bool_3 with pid 1478818 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.70 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.70 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.70 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.70 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.70 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1478821 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.70 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.70 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.70 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.70 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.70 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.70 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.70 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.70
% 0.15/0.70 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.70 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.70 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.70 % Parsed axioms : 1392
% 0.15/0.70 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 984
% 0.15/0.70 % Initial clauses : 408
% 0.15/0.70 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Initial clauses in saturation : 408
% 0.15/0.70 % Processed clauses : 650
% 0.15/0.70 % ...of these trivial : 10
% 0.15/0.70 % ...subsumed : 95
% 0.15/0.70 % ...remaining for further processing : 545
% 0.15/0.70 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.15/0.70 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.15/0.70 % Generated clauses : 1874
% 0.15/0.70 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1655
% 0.15/0.70 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Paramodulations : 1869
% 0.15/0.70 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Equation resolutions : 5
% 0.15/0.70 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Total rewrite steps : 194
% 0.15/0.70 % ...of those cached : 85
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.70 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.70 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.70 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.70 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.70 % Current number of processed clauses : 540
% 0.15/0.70 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 104
% 0.15/0.70 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.15/0.70 % Non-unit-clauses : 430
% 0.15/0.70 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1413
% 0.15/0.70 % ...number of literals in the above : 1715
% 0.15/0.70 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.15/0.70 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 51502
% 0.15/0.70 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 51309
% 0.15/0.70 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 93
% 0.15/0.70 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 56
% 0.15/0.70 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % BW rewrite match attempts : 267
% 0.15/0.70 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.15/0.70 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.70 % Termbank termtop insertions : 39922
% 0.15/0.70 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2542
% 0.15/0.70
% 0.15/0.70 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.70 % User time : 0.032 s
% 0.15/0.70 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.70 % Total time : 0.035 s
% 0.15/0.70 % Maximum resident set size: 4884 pages
% 0.15/0.70
% 0.15/0.70 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.70 % User time : 0.055 s
% 0.15/0.70 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.70 % Total time : 0.060 s
% 0.15/0.70 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.15/0.70 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------