%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE_E---1.7
% Problem : SEU189+2 : TPTP v9.2.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/lemma_parallel_prover %s --lemma-prover /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cse --final-prover /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --proof-time %d --global-time-limit %d
% Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue May 5 05:11:00 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 1.35s 1.78s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.35s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 40 ( 30 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 37 ( 13 ~; 14 |; 4 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 6 ( 0 sgn 4 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t65_relat_1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ( relation_dom(X1) = empty_set
<=> relation_rng(X1) = empty_set ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t65_relat_1) ).
fof(t64_relat_1,lemma,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ( ( relation_dom(X1) = empty_set
| relation_rng(X1) = empty_set )
=> X1 = empty_set ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t64_relat_1) ).
fof(t60_relat_1,lemma,
( relation_dom(empty_set) = empty_set
& relation_rng(empty_set) = empty_set ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t60_relat_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ( relation_dom(X1) = empty_set
<=> relation_rng(X1) = empty_set ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t65_relat_1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,lemma,
! [X769] :
( ( relation_dom(X769) != empty_set
| X769 = empty_set
| ~ relation(X769) )
& ( relation_rng(X769) != empty_set
| X769 = empty_set
| ~ relation(X769) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t64_relat_1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( relation(esk50_0)
& ( relation_dom(esk50_0) != empty_set
| relation_rng(esk50_0) != empty_set )
& ( relation_dom(esk50_0) = empty_set
| relation_rng(esk50_0) = empty_set ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,lemma,
( X1 = empty_set
| relation_dom(X1) != empty_set
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(esk50_0) = empty_set
| relation_rng(esk50_0) = empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk50_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,lemma,
( X1 = empty_set
| relation_rng(X1) != empty_set
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( relation_rng(esk50_0) = empty_set
| esk50_0 = empty_set ),
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,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(esk50_0) != empty_set
| relation_rng(esk50_0) != empty_set ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
esk50_0 = empty_set,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,lemma,
relation_dom(empty_set) = empty_set,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[t60_relat_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,lemma,
relation_rng(empty_set) = empty_set,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[t60_relat_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),c_0_12]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU189+2 : TPTP v9.2.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.12 % Command : /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/lemma_parallel_prover %s --lemma-prover /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cse --final-prover /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --proof-time %d --global-time-limit %d
% 0.15/0.32 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.33 % DateTime : Tue May 5 02:47:15 EDT 2026
% 0.15/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.34 % start to proof: theBenchmark
% 1.35/1.78 % Version : CSE_E---1.7
% 1.35/1.78 % Problem : theBenchmark.p
% 1.35/1.78 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.35/1.78 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.35/1.78 % Total time : 1.422s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------