%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SEU247+2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art09.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory : 2018MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Dec 30 02:27:01 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 4.99s
% Output : Solution 4.99s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP336/SEU247+2.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ...
% found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP336/SEU247+2.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP336/SEU247+2.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 438
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.070 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(4, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:(relation(X3)=>relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X3),X2)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X3,X2))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t140_relat_1)).
% fof(5, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t17_wellord1)).
% fof(305, conjecture,![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t18_wellord1)).
% fof(306, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[305])).
% fof(351, plain,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:(~(relation(X3))|relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X3),X2)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X3,X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[4])).
% fof(352, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(~(relation(X6))|relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X4,X6),X5)=relation_rng_restriction(X4,relation_dom_restriction(X6,X5))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[351])).
% cnf(353,plain,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X3)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X3))|~relation(X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[352])).
% fof(354, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~(relation(X2))|relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X1)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[5])).
% fof(355, plain,![X3]:![X4]:(~(relation(X4))|relation_restriction(X4,X3)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X3,X4),X3)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[354])).
% cnf(356,plain,(relation_restriction(X1,X2)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X2,X1),X2)|~relation(X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[355])).
% fof(1755, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:?[X2]:(relation(X2)&~(relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[306])).
% fof(1756, negated_conjecture,?[X3]:?[X4]:(relation(X4)&~(relation_restriction(X4,X3)=relation_rng_restriction(X3,relation_dom_restriction(X4,X3)))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[1755])).
% fof(1757, negated_conjecture,(relation(esk121_0)&~(relation_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0)=relation_rng_restriction(esk120_0,relation_dom_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0)))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[1756])).
% cnf(1758,negated_conjecture,(relation_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0)!=relation_rng_restriction(esk120_0,relation_dom_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[1757])).
% cnf(1759,negated_conjecture,(relation(esk121_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[1757])).
% cnf(2524,negated_conjecture,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(esk120_0,esk121_0),esk120_0)!=relation_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0)|~relation(esk121_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[1758,353,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2531,negated_conjecture,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(esk120_0,esk121_0),esk120_0)!=relation_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0)|$false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[2524,1759,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2532,negated_conjecture,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(esk120_0,esk121_0),esk120_0)!=relation_restriction(esk121_0,esk120_0)),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[2531,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(10787,negated_conjecture,(~relation(esk121_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[2532,356,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(10788,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[10787,1759,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(10789,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[10788,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(10790,negated_conjecture,($false),10789,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 1203
% # ...of these trivial : 9
% # ...subsumed : 37
% # ...remaining for further processing: 1157
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 91
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 0
% # Generated clauses : 7963
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 7622
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 25
% # Paramodulations : 7819
% # Factorizations : 14
% # Equation resolutions : 130
% # Current number of processed clauses: 574
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 65
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% # Negative unit clauses : 10
% # Non-unit-clauses : 496
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7613
% # ...number of literals in the above : 38711
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 30868
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10951
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 20
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 59
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 50
% # Backwards rewriting index: 644 leaves, 1.55+/-3.143 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 266 leaves, 1.17+/-1.503 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 578 leaves, 1.40+/-2.689 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.519 s
% # System time : 0.022 s
% # Total time : 0.541 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.87 CPU 0.96 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.87 CPU 0.96 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP336/SEU247+2.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------