%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : iProver---3.9.4
% Problem : SEU196+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% Computer : n002.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 : Fri Sep 25 02:55:51 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 2.16s 1.30s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 34 ( 12 unt; 3 def)
% Number of atoms : 89 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 72 ( 33 ~; 27 |; 5 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 7 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 5 usr; 4 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 0 sgn 32 !; 2 ?; 8 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f7,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( relation(X0)
=> relation(relation_dom_restriction(X0,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k7_relat_1) ).
fof(f25,axiom,
! [X0] :
( relation(X0)
=> ! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ( subset(X0,X1)
=> ( subset(relation_rng(X0),relation_rng(X1))
& subset(relation_dom(X0),relation_dom(X1)) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t25_relat_1) ).
fof(f32,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> subset(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X0),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t88_relat_1) ).
fof(f34,conjecture,
! [X0,X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X0)),relation_rng(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t99_relat_1) ).
fof(f35,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X0,X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X0)),relation_rng(X1)) ),
inference(negated_conjecture,[status(cth)],[f34]) ).
fof(f39,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ relation(X0)
| relation(relation_dom_restriction(X0,X1)) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f7]) ).
fof(f48,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ relation(X0)
| ! [X1] :
( ~ relation(X1)
| ~ subset(X0,X1)
| ( subset(relation_rng(X0),relation_rng(X1))
& subset(relation_dom(X0),relation_dom(X1)) ) ) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f25]) ).
fof(f49,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ relation(X0)
| ! [X1] :
( ~ relation(X1)
| ~ subset(X0,X1)
| ( subset(relation_rng(X0),relation_rng(X1))
& subset(relation_dom(X0),relation_dom(X1)) ) ) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f48]) ).
fof(f57,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ relation(X1)
| subset(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X0),X1) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f32]) ).
fof(f59,plain,
? [X0,X1] :
( relation(X1)
& ~ subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X0)),relation_rng(X1)) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f35]) ).
fof(f68,plain,
( relation(sK8)
& ~ subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(sK8,sK7)),relation_rng(sK8)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK7,sK8]),skolemize(X0,sK7),skolemize(X1,sK8)],[f59]) ).
fof(f71,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ relation(X0)
| relation(relation_dom_restriction(X0,X1)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f39]) ).
fof(f95,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ relation(X0)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ subset(X0,X1)
| subset(relation_rng(X0),relation_rng(X1)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f49]) ).
fof(f104,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ relation(X1)
| subset(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X0),X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f57]) ).
fof(f106,plain,
relation(sK8),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f68]) ).
fof(f107,plain,
~ subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(sK8,sK7)),relation_rng(sK8)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f68]) ).
tcf(c_51,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] :
( relation(relation_dom_restriction(X0,X1))
| ~ relation(X0) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f71]) ).
tcf(c_76,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] :
( subset(relation_rng(X0),relation_rng(X1))
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X0)
| ~ subset(X0,X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f95]) ).
tcf(c_84,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] :
( subset(relation_dom_restriction(X0,X1),X0)
| ~ relation(X0) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f104]) ).
tcf(c_86,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(relation_rng(relation_dom_restriction(sK8,sK7)),relation_rng(sK8)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f107]) ).
tcf(c_87,negated_conjecture,
relation(sK8),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f106]) ).
tcf(c_1104,definition,
iPr_def_10 = relation_dom_restriction(sK8,sK7),
introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[iPr_def_10])],[]) ).
tcf(c_1105,definition,
iPr_def_11 = relation_rng(iPr_def_10),
introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[iPr_def_11])],[]) ).
tcf(c_1106,definition,
iPr_def_12 = relation_rng(sK8),
introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[iPr_def_12])],[]) ).
tcf(c_1107,negated_conjecture,
relation(sK8),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_87]) ).
tcf(c_1108,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(iPr_def_11,iPr_def_12),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_86,c_1106,c_1104,c_1105]) ).
tcf(c_1812,plain,
( relation(iPr_def_10)
| ~ relation(sK8) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_1104,c_51]) ).
tcf(c_1813,plain,
relation(iPr_def_10),
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_1812,c_1107]) ).
tcf(c_1889,plain,
( subset(iPr_def_10,sK8)
| ~ relation(sK8) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_1104,c_84]) ).
tcf(c_1890,plain,
subset(iPr_def_10,sK8),
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_1889,c_1107]) ).
tcf(c_2021,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( subset(relation_rng(X0),iPr_def_12)
| ~ relation(sK8)
| ~ relation(X0)
| ~ subset(X0,sK8) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_1106,c_76]) ).
tcf(c_2032,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( subset(relation_rng(X0),iPr_def_12)
| ~ relation(X0)
| ~ subset(X0,sK8) ),
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2021,c_1107]) ).
tcf(c_2092,plain,
( subset(iPr_def_11,iPr_def_12)
| ~ relation(iPr_def_10)
| ~ subset(iPr_def_10,sK8) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_1105,c_2032]) ).
tcf(c_2093,plain,
$false,
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2092,c_1108,c_1813,c_1890]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU196+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.09/0.38 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.38 % DateTime : Thu Sep 24 13:10:49 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.38 Running run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.09/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.42 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/iproveropt-multi-core.sh -d -n -l tptp -s fof_schedule -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % ======== iProver multi-core TPTP/SMT =========
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % Detected problem language: tptp
% 0.09/0.44 % Proving...
% 2.16/1.30 % SZS status Started for theBenchmark.p
% 2.16/1.30 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 %---------------- iProver v3.9.4 (pre CASC 2026/SMT-COMP 2026) ----------------%
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ iProver source info
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % git: date: 2026-07-19 20:42:38 +0200
% 2.16/1.30 % git: sha1: 804e7d636a263075307957e923b7a22a4035de61
% 2.16/1.30 % git: non_committed_changes: false
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Parsing...
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Clausification by vclausify_rel & Parsing by iProver...%
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Preprocessing... sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e pe_s pe_e sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e pe_s pe_e %
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Preprocessing... gs_s sp: 0 0s gs_e snvd_s sp: 0 0s snvd_e %
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Preprocessing... sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e sf_s rm: 0 0s sf_e
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Proving...
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Problem Properties
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 %
% 2.16/1.30 % clauses 41
% 2.16/1.30 % conjectures 2
% 2.16/1.30 % EPR 20
% 2.16/1.30 % Horn 39
% 2.16/1.30 % unary 18
% 2.16/1.30 % binary 15
% 2.16/1.30 % lits 74
% 2.16/1.30 % lits eq 5
% 2.16/1.30 % fd_pure 0
% 2.16/1.30 % fd_pseudo 0
% 2.16/1.30 % fd_cond 1
% 2.16/1.30 % fd_pseudo_cond 1
% 2.16/1.30 % AC symbols 0
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Schedule dynamic 5 is on
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Input Options "--resolution_flag false --inst_lit_sel_side none" Time Limit: 10.
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------
% 2.16/1.30 % Current options:
% 2.16/1.30 % ------
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 %
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % ------ Proving...
% 2.16/1.30 %
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.16/1.30
% 2.16/1.30
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------