%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : ALG298^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n015.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 : Wed Sep 30 07:44:52 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 0.31s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 11 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 26 ( 25 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 150 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 10 &; 135 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 3 usr)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 6 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 11 ( 9 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 0 ^; 43 !; 2 ?; 45 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
c: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort3,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
c_starc: c > c > c ).
thf(decl_24,type,
c_starb: b > b > b ).
thf(decl_25,type,
c_stara: a > a > a ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk1_0: a > b ).
thf(decl_27,type,
esk2_0: a > c ).
thf(decl_28,type,
esk3_0: b > c ).
thf(decl_29,type,
esk4_1: b > a ).
thf(decl_30,type,
esk5_0: b ).
thf(decl_31,type,
esk6_0: b ).
thf(cTHM270_pme,conjecture,
! [X1: a > b,X2: a > c,X3: b > c] :
( ( ! [X4: a] :
( ( X3 @ ( X1 @ X4 ) )
= ( X2 @ X4 ) )
& ! [X5: b] :
? [X4: a] :
( ( X1 @ X4 )
= X5 )
& ! [X4: a,X6: a] :
( ( X1 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
= ( c_starb @ ( X1 @ X4 ) @ ( X1 @ X6 ) ) )
& ! [X4: a,X7: a] :
( ( X2 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X7 ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( X2 @ X4 ) @ ( X2 @ X7 ) ) ) )
=> ! [X8: b,X5: b] :
( ( X3 @ ( c_starb @ X8 @ X5 ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( X3 @ X8 ) @ ( X3 @ X5 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.36PJ16Jwg8/E---3.1_3865542.p',cTHM270_pme) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: a > b,X2: a > c,X3: b > c] :
( ( ! [X4: a] :
( ( X3 @ ( X1 @ X4 ) )
= ( X2 @ X4 ) )
& ! [X5: b] :
? [X4: a] :
( ( X1 @ X4 )
= X5 )
& ! [X4: a,X6: a] :
( ( X1 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
= ( c_starb @ ( X1 @ X4 ) @ ( X1 @ X6 ) ) )
& ! [X4: a,X7: a] :
( ( X2 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X7 ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( X2 @ X4 ) @ ( X2 @ X7 ) ) ) )
=> ! [X8: b,X5: b] :
( ( X3 @ ( c_starb @ X8 @ X5 ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( X3 @ X8 ) @ ( X3 @ X5 ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM270_pme]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X24: a,X25: b,X27: a,X28: a,X29: a,X30: a] :
( ( ( esk3_0 @ ( esk1_0 @ X24 ) )
= ( esk2_0 @ X24 ) )
& ( ( esk1_0 @ ( esk4_1 @ X25 ) )
= X25 )
& ( ( esk1_0 @ ( c_stara @ X27 @ X28 ) )
= ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X27 ) @ ( esk1_0 @ X28 ) ) )
& ( ( esk2_0 @ ( c_stara @ X29 @ X30 ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X29 ) @ ( esk2_0 @ X30 ) ) )
& ( ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ esk5_0 @ esk6_0 ) )
!= ( c_starc @ ( esk3_0 @ esk5_0 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ esk6_0 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a] :
( ( esk3_0 @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) )
= ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X5: b] :
( ( esk1_0 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) )
= X5 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a,X6: a] :
( ( esk1_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
= ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk1_0 @ X6 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a,X6: a] :
( ( esk2_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk2_0 @ X6 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X5: b] :
( ( esk2_0 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) )
= ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a,X5: b] :
( ( esk1_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) ) )
= ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) @ X5 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a,X5: b] :
( ( esk2_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) ) )
= ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a,X5: b] :
( ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) )
= ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) @ X5 ) ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ esk5_0 @ esk6_0 ) )
!= ( c_starc @ ( esk3_0 @ esk5_0 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ esk6_0 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
! [X5: b,X8: b] :
( ( c_starc @ ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ X8 ) )
= ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ X5 @ X8 ) ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_7]),c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : ALG298^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.20 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.20 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.20 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.20 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.20 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.20 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.20 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.20 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 17:41:18 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.21 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.21 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.28 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.29 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.36PJ16Jwg8/E---3.1_3865542.p
% 0.25/0.31 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.25/0.31 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.25/0.31 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % new_bool_9 with pid 3865556 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Result found by new_bool_9
% 0.25/0.31 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.25/0.31 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.31 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.31 % Search class: HUUPM-FFSF21-SSSFFFNN
% 0.25/0.31 % partial match(3): FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.31 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3865564 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.31 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.25/0.31 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.31 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.31 % Search class: HUUPM-FFSF21-SSSFFFNN
% 0.25/0.31 % partial match(3): FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.31 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.31 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.31 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.25/0.31
% 0.25/0.31 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.31 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/0.31 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.31 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.25/0.31 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 6
% 0.25/0.31 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.25/0.31 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.25/0.31 % Processed clauses : 13
% 0.25/0.31 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % ...remaining for further processing : 13
% 0.25/0.31 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.25/0.31 % Generated clauses : 26
% 0.25/0.31 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 21
% 0.25/0.31 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Paramodulations : 26
% 0.25/0.31 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Total rewrite steps : 14
% 0.25/0.31 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.31 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.31 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.31 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.31 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.31 % Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.25/0.31 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.25/0.31 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 13
% 0.25/0.31 % ...number of literals in the above : 13
% 0.25/0.31 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.25/0.31 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.25/0.31 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.25/0.31 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.31 % Termbank termtop insertions : 847
% 0.25/0.31 % Search garbage collected termcells : 204
% 0.25/0.31
% 0.25/0.31 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.31 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.31 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.25/0.31 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.31 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.25/0.31
% 0.25/0.31 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.31 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.31 % System time : 0.012 s
% 0.25/0.31 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.25/0.31 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.31 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------