%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR121^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 07:46:33 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 3 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 86 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 20 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 237 ( 39 ~; 31 |; 13 &; 154 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 6 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 9 ( 7 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 ^; 7 !; 3 ?; 10 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI: $i > $o > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
lBill_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_25,type,
lMary_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_26,type,
lSue_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_27,type,
lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI: $i > $i ).
thf(decl_28,type,
likes_THFTYPE_IiioI: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_29,type,
n2009_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(con,conjecture,
? [X1: $i] :
( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i )
@ ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.e65oxv9u0w/E---3.1_1385254.p',con) ).
thf(ax,axiom,
( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i )
@ ~ ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.e65oxv9u0w/E---3.1_1385254.p',ax) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1: $i] :
( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i )
@ ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1: $i] :
( ( ~ ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) ) ),
inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,plain,
( ( ~ ~ ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ~ ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[ax])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i] :
( ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X3 )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X3 )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X3 ) )
& ( ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X3 ) )
& ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X3 )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X3 )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X3 ) )
& ( ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X3 ) )
& ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X3 )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X3 )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_6,plain,
( ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) )
& ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_13,plain,
( ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i,
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i,
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_17,plain,
holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]) ).
thf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ X1 )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ X1 ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17])]) ).
thf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : CSR121^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.20 % Computer : n020.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 17:55:19 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.20 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.20 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.25 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.26 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.e65oxv9u0w/E---3.1_1385254.p
% 0.19/0.28 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.19/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % sh4l with pid 1385269 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Result found by sh4l
% 0.19/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/0.28 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.28 % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1385271 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/0.28 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.28 % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.28 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.19/0.28
% 0.19/0.28 % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.28 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.28 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.28 % Parsed axioms : 10
% 0.19/0.28 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Initial clauses : 17
% 0.19/0.28 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 10
% 0.19/0.28 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.19/0.28 % Processed clauses : 13
% 0.19/0.28 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % ...remaining for further processing : 13
% 0.19/0.28 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Backward-subsumed : 4
% 0.19/0.28 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.19/0.28 % Generated clauses : 8
% 0.19/0.28 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8
% 0.19/0.28 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Paramodulations : 4
% 0.19/0.28 % Factorizations : 4
% 0.19/0.28 % NegExts : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Total rewrite steps : 8
% 0.19/0.28 % ...of those cached : 5
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.28 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.28 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.28 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.28 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.28 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.19/0.28 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.19/0.28 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.19/0.28 % Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.19/0.28 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.28 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.19/0.28 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.19/0.28 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.19/0.28 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.19/0.28 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.19/0.28 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.19/0.28 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/0.28 % Termbank termtop insertions : 725
% 0.19/0.28 % Search garbage collected termcells : 63
% 0.19/0.28
% 0.19/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.28 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.19/0.28 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.19/0.28 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.19/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.19/0.28
% 0.19/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.28 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.19/0.28 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.19/0.28 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.19/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.19/0.28 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------