%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM024^5 : 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 : 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 : Wed Sep 30 07:46:10 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.11s 0.25s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 8 ( 5 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 11 ( 10 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 39 ( 4 ~; 0 |; 1 &; 32 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 8 ( 8 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 ( 1 ^; 12 !; 2 ?; 15 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
cTM: $i > $i > $i ).
thf(decl_24,type,
cTH: ( $i > $i ) > $i ).
thf(decl_25,type,
esk1_0: $i > $i ).
thf(cTHM9,conjecture,
( ! [X1: $i > $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( cTH @ X1 ) )
= X1 )
=> ! [X2: $i > $i] :
? [X3: $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( X2 @ X3 ) )
= ( cTM @ X3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.NDGMHc8N3L/E---3.1_3707165.p',cTHM9) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X1: $i > $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( cTH @ X1 ) )
= X1 )
=> ! [X2: $i > $i] :
? [X3: $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( X2 @ X3 ) )
= ( cTM @ X3 ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM9]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X7: $i > $i,X9: $i] :
( ( ( cTM @ ( cTH @ X7 ) )
= X7 )
& ( ( cTM @ ( esk1_0 @ X9 ) )
!= ( cTM @ X9 ) ) ),
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,
! [X1: $i > $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( cTH @ X1 ) )
= X1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( esk1_0 @ X3 ) )
!= ( cTM @ X3 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i > $i,X3: $i] :
( ( cTM @ ( cTH @ X1 ) @ X3 )
= ( X1 @ X3 ) ),
inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i > $i,X3: $i] :
( ( cTM
@ ( cTM
@ ( cTH
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( esk1_0 @ ( X1 @ Z0 ) ) )
@ X3 ) )
!= ( cTM @ ( X1 @ X3 ) ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : COM024^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.17 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.17 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.17 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.17 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.17 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.17 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.17 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.17 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 17:44:10 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.17 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.17 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.22 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.23 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.NDGMHc8N3L/E---3.1_3707165.p
% 0.11/0.25 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.11/0.25 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSN.
% 0.11/0.25 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_nonlambdatoforall with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % post_as_ho10 with pid 3707196 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Result found by post_as_ho10
% 0.11/0.25 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSN.
% 0.11/0.25 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_nonlambdatoforall with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.25 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.25 % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF21-SSSFFFNN
% 0.11/0.25 % partial match(2): HUUPF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.25 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3707206 completed with status 10
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % post_as_ho10 with pid 3707211 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Result found by post_as_ho10
% 0.11/0.25 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSN.
% 0.11/0.25 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_nonlambdatoforall with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.25 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.25 % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF21-SSSFFFNN
% 0.11/0.25 % partial match(2): HUUPF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.25 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3707206 completed with status 10
% 0.11/0.25 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.25 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.25 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.11/0.25
% 0.11/0.25 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.25 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/0.25 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.25 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.11/0.25 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.11/0.25 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.11/0.25 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.11/0.25 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.11/0.25 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.11/0.25 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Generated clauses : 49
% 0.11/0.25 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 30
% 0.11/0.25 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Paramodulations : 43
% 0.11/0.25 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % NegExts : 2
% 0.11/0.25 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.11/0.25 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.11/0.25 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.25 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.25 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.25 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.25 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.25 % Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.11/0.25 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.11/0.25 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.11/0.25 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.11/0.25 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 25
% 0.11/0.25 % ...number of literals in the above : 25
% 0.11/0.25 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.11/0.25 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.11/0.25 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % BW rewrite match attempts : 19
% 0.11/0.25 % BW rewrite match successes : 7
% 0.11/0.25 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.25 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4427
% 0.11/0.25 % Search garbage collected termcells : 51
% 0.11/0.25
% 0.11/0.25 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.25 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.11/0.25 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.25 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.11/0.25 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.11/0.25
% 0.11/0.25 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.25 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.11/0.25 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.11/0.25 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.11/0.25 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.25 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------