%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU177+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n019.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 02:28:24 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.02s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.02s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 73 ( 12 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 92 ( 36 ~; 36 |; 10 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 42 ( 4 sgn 26 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d5_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( X2 = relation_rng(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> ? [X4] : in(ordered_pair(X4,X3),X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d5_relat_1) ).
fof(t20_relat_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( relation(X3)
=> ( in(ordered_pair(X1,X2),X3)
=> ( in(X2,relation_rng(X3))
& in(X1,relation_dom(X3)) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t20_relat_1) ).
fof(d4_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( X2 = relation_dom(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> ? [X4] : in(ordered_pair(X3,X4),X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d4_relat_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X12,X13,X14,X16,X17,X18,X20] :
( ( ~ relation(X12)
| X18 = relation_rng(X12)
| in(ordered_pair(esk6_2(X12,X18),esk5_2(X12,X18)),X12)
| in(esk5_2(X12,X18),X18) )
& ( ~ relation(X12)
| X18 = relation_rng(X12)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X20,esk5_2(X12,X18)),X12)
| ~ in(esk5_2(X12,X18),X18) )
& ( ~ relation(X12)
| X13 != relation_rng(X12)
| in(X16,X13)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X17,X16),X12) )
& ( ~ relation(X12)
| X13 != relation_rng(X12)
| in(ordered_pair(esk4_3(X12,X13,X14),X14),X12)
| ~ in(X14,X13) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d5_relat_1])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( relation(X3)
=> ( in(ordered_pair(X1,X2),X3)
=> ( in(X2,relation_rng(X3))
& in(X1,relation_dom(X3)) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t20_relat_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ relation(X3)
| X4 != relation_rng(X3)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X1,X2),X3)
| in(X2,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ( ~ in(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk3_0))
| ~ in(esk1_0,relation_dom(esk3_0)) )
& in(ordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0)
& relation(esk3_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X22,X23,X24,X26,X27,X28,X30] :
( ( ~ relation(X22)
| X28 = relation_dom(X22)
| in(ordered_pair(esk8_2(X22,X28),esk9_2(X22,X28)),X22)
| in(esk8_2(X22,X28),X28) )
& ( ~ relation(X22)
| X28 = relation_dom(X22)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(esk8_2(X22,X28),X30),X22)
| ~ in(esk8_2(X22,X28),X28) )
& ( ~ relation(X22)
| X23 != relation_dom(X22)
| in(X26,X23)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X26,X27),X22) )
& ( ~ relation(X22)
| X23 != relation_dom(X22)
| in(ordered_pair(X24,esk7_3(X22,X23,X24)),X22)
| ~ in(X24,X23) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d4_relat_1])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ relation(X2)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X3,X1),X2)
| in(X1,relation_rng(X2)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
in(ordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ relation(X3)
| X4 != relation_dom(X3)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X1,X2),X3)
| in(X1,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk3_0))
| ~ in(esk1_0,relation_dom(esk3_0)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
in(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk3_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ relation(X2)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(X1,X3),X2)
| in(X1,relation_dom(X2)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ in(esk1_0,relation_dom(esk3_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),c_0_15]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SEU177+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.36 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:54:49 UTC 2026
% 0.02/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.02/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.02/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.02/0.41 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
% 0.02/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.02/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.02/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % new_bool_1 with pid 1828929 completed with status 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.02/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.02/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.02/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.02/0.43 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.02/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.02/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1828931 completed with status 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.02/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.02/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.02/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.02/0.43 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.02/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.02/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.02/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.02/0.43
% 0.02/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.02/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.02/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.02/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 26
% 0.02/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 16
% 0.02/0.43 % Initial clauses : 19
% 0.02/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 19
% 0.02/0.43 % Processed clauses : 25
% 0.02/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.02/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.02/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.02/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.02/0.43 % Generated clauses : 11
% 0.02/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 12
% 0.02/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Paramodulations : 9
% 0.02/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.02/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 6
% 0.02/0.43 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 19
% 0.02/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.02/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.02/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 6
% 0.02/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 6
% 0.02/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 24
% 0.02/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.02/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 12
% 0.02/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.02/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.02/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.02/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.02/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.02/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.02/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1528
% 0.02/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 479
% 0.02/0.43
% 0.02/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.02/0.43 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.02/0.43 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.02/0.43 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.02/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.02/0.43
% 0.02/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.02/0.43 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.02/0.43 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.02/0.43 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.02/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.02/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------