%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU040+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 : n015.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 02:23:43 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.09s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 29 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 26 ( 10 ~; 6 |; 6 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 2 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t76_funct_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( function(X2)
& relation(X2) )
=> ( subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)),relation_rng(X2))
& subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)),relation_dom(X2)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t76_funct_1) ).
fof(t99_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)),relation_rng(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t99_relat_1) ).
fof(t89_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)),relation_dom(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t89_relat_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( ( function(X2)
& relation(X2) )
=> ( subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)),relation_rng(X2))
& subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)),relation_dom(X2)) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t76_funct_1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ( ~ subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(esk13_0,esk12_0)),relation_rng(esk13_0))
| ~ subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(esk13_0,esk12_0)),relation_dom(esk13_0)) )
& function(esk13_0)
& relation(esk13_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_5,plain,
! [X56,X57] :
( subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X57,X56)),relation_rng(X57))
| ~ relation(X57) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t99_relat_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(esk13_0,esk12_0)),relation_rng(esk13_0))
| ~ subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(esk13_0,esk12_0)),relation_dom(esk13_0)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ relation(X1)
| subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2)),relation_rng(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk13_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X54,X55] :
( subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X55,X54)),relation_dom(X55))
| ~ relation(X55) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t89_relat_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(esk13_0,esk12_0)),relation_dom(esk13_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ relation(X1)
| subset(relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2)),relation_dom(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU040+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.37 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:51:07 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41 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
% 0.09/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 694908 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.09/0.43 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.09/0.43 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 694912 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.09/0.43 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.09/0.43 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 38
% 0.09/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Initial clauses : 60
% 0.09/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.09/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 58
% 0.09/0.44 % Processed clauses : 89
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.09/0.44 % ...subsumed : 13
% 0.09/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 73
% 0.09/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.09/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 7
% 0.09/0.44 % Generated clauses : 79
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 60
% 0.09/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.09/0.44 % Paramodulations : 79
% 0.09/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 31
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of those cached : 20
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 65
% 0.09/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 23
% 0.09/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.09/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 38
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 23
% 0.09/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 77
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.09/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 270
% 0.09/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 245
% 0.09/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 15
% 0.09/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 32
% 0.09/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.09/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.09/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3581
% 0.09/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 438
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.44 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.09/0.44 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3608 pages
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.44 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.09/0.44 % System time : 0.016 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Total time : 0.031 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.09/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------