%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU026+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 : n008.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 02:23:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.28s 0.73s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.28s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 30 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 105 ( 27 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 129 ( 54 ~; 49 |; 13 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 13 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 31 ( 1 sgn 17 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t46_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> ( subset(relation_rng(X1),relation_dom(X2))
=> relation_dom(relation_composition(X1,X2)) = relation_dom(X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t46_relat_1) ).
fof(t55_funct_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( function(X1)
& relation(X1) )
=> ( one_to_one(X1)
=> ( relation_dom(X1) = relation_rng(function_inverse(X1))
& relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1)) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t55_funct_1) ).
fof(dt_k2_funct_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( function(X1)
& relation(X1) )
=> ( function(function_inverse(X1))
& relation(function_inverse(X1)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k2_funct_1) ).
fof(t59_funct_1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ( function(X1)
& relation(X1) )
=> ( one_to_one(X1)
=> ( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1)) = relation_rng(X1)
& relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1)) = relation_rng(X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t59_funct_1) ).
fof(reflexivity_r1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : subset(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reflexivity_r1_tarski) ).
fof(t47_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> ( subset(relation_dom(X1),relation_rng(X2))
=> relation_rng(relation_composition(X2,X1)) = relation_rng(X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t47_relat_1) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X44,X45] :
( relation_dom(relation_composition(X44,X45)) = relation_dom(X44)
| ~ subset(relation_rng(X44),relation_dom(X45))
| ~ relation(X45)
| ~ relation(X44) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t46_relat_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X51] :
( ( ~ function(X51)
| ~ relation(X51)
| ~ one_to_one(X51)
| relation_dom(X51) = relation_rng(function_inverse(X51)) )
& ( ~ function(X51)
| ~ relation(X51)
| ~ one_to_one(X51)
| relation_rng(X51) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X51)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t55_funct_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X9] :
( ( ~ function(X9)
| ~ relation(X9)
| function(function_inverse(X9)) )
& ( ~ function(X9)
| ~ relation(X9)
| relation(function_inverse(X9)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[dt_k2_funct_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ( function(X1)
& relation(X1) )
=> ( one_to_one(X1)
=> ( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1)) = relation_rng(X1)
& relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1)) = relation_rng(X1) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t59_funct_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ subset(relation_rng(X1),relation_dom(X2))
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| relation_dom(relation_composition(X1,X2)) = relation_dom(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| relation_dom(X1) = relation_rng(function_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| relation(function_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X37] : subset(X37,X37),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reflexivity_r1_tarski])]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X46,X47] :
( relation_rng(relation_composition(X47,X46)) = relation_rng(X46)
| ~ subset(relation_dom(X46),relation_rng(X47))
| ~ relation(X47)
| ~ relation(X46) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t47_relat_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0) )
& one_to_one(esk12_0)
& function(esk12_0)
& relation(esk12_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| ~ subset(relation_dom(X1),relation_dom(X2))
| relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X2)) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ subset(relation_dom(X1),relation_rng(X2))
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| relation_rng(relation_composition(X2,X1)) = relation_rng(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1)) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk12_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk12_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
function(esk12_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| ~ subset(relation_dom(X2),relation_dom(X1))
| relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X2)) = relation_rng(X2) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_11]),c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(function_inverse(esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),c_0_22]),c_0_23])]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1)) = relation_rng(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
relation_dom(function_inverse(esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]),c_0_21]),c_0_22]),c_0_23])]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]),c_0_21]),c_0_22]),c_0_23])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SEU026+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.46 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:48:23 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.54 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
% 0.28/0.73 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.28/0.73 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.73 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 275278 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.73 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.28/0.73 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.73 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.28/0.73 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.28/0.73 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.73 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with pid 275285 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.73 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y
% 0.28/0.73 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.73 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.28/0.73 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.28/0.73 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.73 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.73 % Preprocessing time : 0.004 s
% 0.28/0.73
% 0.28/0.73 % Proof found!
% 0.28/0.73 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.28/0.73 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.28/0.74 % Parsed axioms : 41
% 0.28/0.74 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Initial clauses : 67
% 0.28/0.74 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.28/0.74 % Initial clauses in saturation : 65
% 0.28/0.74 % Processed clauses : 757
% 0.28/0.74 % ...of these trivial : 6
% 0.28/0.74 % ...subsumed : 476
% 0.28/0.74 % ...remaining for further processing : 275
% 0.28/0.74 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Backward-subsumed : 28
% 0.28/0.74 % Backward-rewritten : 34
% 0.28/0.74 % Generated clauses : 3253
% 0.28/0.74 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3049
% 0.28/0.74 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 43
% 0.28/0.74 % Paramodulations : 3253
% 0.28/0.74 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % NegExts : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Total rewrite steps : 1160
% 0.28/0.74 % ...of those cached : 1127
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.74 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.74 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.74 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.74 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.74 % Current number of processed clauses : 213
% 0.28/0.74 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 28
% 0.28/0.74 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Negative unit clauses : 9
% 0.28/0.74 % Non-unit-clauses : 176
% 0.28/0.74 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2217
% 0.28/0.74 % ...number of literals in the above : 11553
% 0.28/0.74 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Current number of archived clauses : 62
% 0.28/0.74 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11794
% 0.28/0.74 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6349
% 0.28/0.74 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 452
% 0.28/0.74 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 184
% 0.28/0.74 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % BW rewrite match attempts : 13
% 0.28/0.74 % BW rewrite match successes : 11
% 0.28/0.74 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.28/0.74 % Termbank termtop insertions : 44783
% 0.28/0.74 % Search garbage collected termcells : 557
% 0.28/0.74
% 0.28/0.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.74 % User time : 0.141 s
% 0.28/0.74 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.28/0.74 % Total time : 0.150 s
% 0.28/0.74 % Maximum resident set size: 3356 pages
% 0.28/0.74
% 0.28/0.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.74 % User time : 0.604 s
% 0.28/0.74 % System time : 0.042 s
% 0.28/0.74 % Total time : 0.646 s
% 0.28/0.74 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.28/0.74 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------