%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU200+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n007.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 02:28:30 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 5.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 41 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 8 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 43 ( 19 ~; 14 |; 3 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 7 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 2 sgn 16 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t118_relat_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> subset(relation_rng(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2)),relation_rng(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t118_relat_1) ).
fof(t25_relat_1,lemma,
! [X1] :
( relation(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> ( subset(X1,X2)
=> ( subset(relation_rng(X1),relation_rng(X2))
& subset(relation_dom(X1),relation_dom(X2)) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t25_relat_1) ).
fof(t117_relat_1,lemma,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> subset(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t117_relat_1) ).
fof(dt_k8_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> relation(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k8_relat_1) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( relation(X2)
=> subset(relation_rng(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2)),relation_rng(X2)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t118_relat_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ subset(relation_rng(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0)),relation_rng(esk2_0))
& relation(esk2_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_6,lemma,
! [X36,X37] :
( ( ~ relation(X36)
| ~ relation(X37)
| ~ subset(X36,X37)
| subset(relation_rng(X36),relation_rng(X37)) )
& ( ~ relation(X36)
| ~ relation(X37)
| ~ subset(X36,X37)
| subset(relation_dom(X36),relation_dom(X37)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t25_relat_1])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(relation_rng(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0)),relation_rng(esk2_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,lemma,
( ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| subset(relation_rng(X1),relation_rng(X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_10,lemma,
! [X56,X57] :
( subset(relation_rng_restriction(X56,X57),X57)
| ~ relation(X57) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t117_relat_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ relation(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0))
| ~ subset(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk2_0) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,lemma,
( ~ relation(X1)
| subset(relation_rng_restriction(X2,X1),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X49,X50] :
( relation(relation_rng_restriction(X49,X50))
| ~ relation(X50) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[dt_k8_relat_1])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,lemma,
~ relation(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_9])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ relation(X1)
| relation(relation_rng_restriction(X2,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,lemma,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU200+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/5.41 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.15/5.41 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/5.41 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/5.41 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/5.41 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/5.41 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/5.41 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/5.41 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:55:26 UTC 2026
% 0.15/5.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/5.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/5.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/5.49 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
% 0.20/5.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.20/5.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/5.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % new_bool_1 with pid 326377 completed with status 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.20/5.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/5.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.20/5.61 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/5.61 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/5.61 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % SubtermCWHack with pid 326380 completed with status 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.20/5.61 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/5.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.20/5.61 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/5.61 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/5.61 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/5.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.20/5.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.20/5.61
% 0.20/5.61 % Proof found!
% 0.20/5.61 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/5.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/5.61 % Parsed axioms : 193
% 0.20/5.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 125
% 0.20/5.61 % Initial clauses : 126
% 0.20/5.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.20/5.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 124
% 0.20/5.61 % Processed clauses : 1542
% 0.20/5.61 % ...of these trivial : 10
% 0.20/5.61 % ...subsumed : 1065
% 0.20/5.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 467
% 0.20/5.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 29
% 0.20/5.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Backward-subsumed : 7
% 0.20/5.61 % Backward-rewritten : 31
% 0.20/5.61 % Generated clauses : 5350
% 0.20/5.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4553
% 0.20/5.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.20/5.61 % Paramodulations : 5308
% 0.20/5.61 % Factorizations : 8
% 0.20/5.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Equation resolutions : 31
% 0.20/5.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Total rewrite steps : 1632
% 0.20/5.61 % ...of those cached : 1537
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/5.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/5.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/5.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/5.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/5.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 407
% 0.20/5.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 38
% 0.20/5.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Negative unit clauses : 43
% 0.20/5.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 326
% 0.20/5.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3035
% 0.20/5.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 10308
% 0.20/5.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 42
% 0.20/5.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 23374
% 0.20/5.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 15642
% 0.20/5.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 650
% 0.20/5.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1446
% 0.20/5.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 35
% 0.20/5.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 13
% 0.20/5.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/5.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 64339
% 0.20/5.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2810
% 0.20/5.61
% 0.20/5.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/5.61 % User time : 0.086 s
% 0.20/5.61 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.20/5.61 % Total time : 0.089 s
% 0.20/5.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4028 pages
% 0.20/5.61
% 0.20/5.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/5.61 % User time : 0.095 s
% 0.20/5.61 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.20/5.61 % Total time : 0.104 s
% 0.20/5.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.20/5.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------