%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR142^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.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 07:46:39 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 10 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 67 ( 11 ~; 7 |; 1 &; 46 @)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 5 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 12 ( 12 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 6 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 0 ^; 17 !; 2 ?; 19 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
husband_THFTYPE_IiioI: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
lChris_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_25,type,
lCorina_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_26,type,
wife_THFTYPE_IiioI: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_27,type,
inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI: ( $i > $i > $o ) > ( $i > $i > $o ) > $o ).
thf(con,conjecture,
? [X5: $i] : ( husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X5 @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.28ElOf4jVq/E---3.1_143927.p',con) ).
thf(ax_001,axiom,
! [X1: $i > $i > $o,X2: $i > $i > $o] :
( ( inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI @ X2 @ X1 )
=> ! [X3: $i,X4: $i] :
( ( X2 @ X3 @ X4 )
<=> ( X1 @ X4 @ X3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.28ElOf4jVq/E---3.1_143927.p',ax_001) ).
thf(ax,axiom,
inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI @ husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ wife_THFTYPE_IiioI,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.28ElOf4jVq/E---3.1_143927.p',ax) ).
thf(ax_002,axiom,
wife_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i @ lChris_THFTYPE_i,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.28ElOf4jVq/E---3.1_143927.p',ax_002) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X5: $i] : ( husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X5 @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
thf(c_0_5,plain,
! [X11: $i > $i > $o,X12: $i > $i > $o,X13: $i,X14: $i] :
( ( ~ ( X12 @ X13 @ X14 )
| ( X11 @ X14 @ X13 )
| ~ ( inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI @ X12 @ X11 ) )
& ( ~ ( X11 @ X14 @ X13 )
| ( X12 @ X13 @ X14 )
| ~ ( inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI @ X12 @ X11 ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax_001])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X15: $i] :
~ ( husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X15 @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
! [X4: $i,X3: $i,X2: $i > $i > $o,X1: $i > $i > $o] :
( ( X2 @ X4 @ X3 )
| ~ ( X1 @ X3 @ X4 )
| ~ ( inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
inverse_THFTYPE_IIiioIIiioIoI @ husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ wife_THFTYPE_IiioI,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i] :
~ ( husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X3 @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X4: $i,X3: $i] :
( ( husband_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X3 @ X4 )
| ~ ( wife_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X4 @ X3 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
wife_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i @ lChris_THFTYPE_i,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax_002]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i] :
~ ( wife_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lCorina_THFTYPE_i @ X3 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_13,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : CSR142^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.20 % Computer : n009.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 17:56:30 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.20 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.20 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.25 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.26 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.28ElOf4jVq/E---3.1_143927.p
% 0.24/0.28 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.24/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSFA.
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting new_ho_14 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting new_ho_13 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % full_lambda_8 with pid 143941 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Result found by full_lambda_8
% 0.24/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSFA.
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting new_ho_14 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.28 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.28 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF00-SSFFFSBN
% 0.24/0.28 % partial match(1): HHUNF-FFSF00-SSSFFSBN
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % SubtermCWHack with pid 143946 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSFA.
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting new_ho_14 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.28 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.28 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF00-SSFFFSBN
% 0.24/0.28 % partial match(1): HHUNF-FFSF00-SSSFFSBN
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.24/0.28
% 0.24/0.28 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.28 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.28 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.28 % Parsed axioms : 10
% 0.24/0.28 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Initial clauses : 11
% 0.24/0.28 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.24/0.28 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.24/0.28 % Processed clauses : 6
% 0.24/0.28 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % ...remaining for further processing : 6
% 0.24/0.28 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.24/0.28 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.24/0.28 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.24/0.28 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.24/0.28 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.28 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.28 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.28 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.24/0.28 % ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.24/0.28 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.28 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.24/0.28 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Termbank termtop insertions : 420
% 0.24/0.28 % Search garbage collected termcells : 75
% 0.24/0.28
% 0.24/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.28 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.24/0.28 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.28 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.24/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.24/0.28
% 0.24/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.28 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.28 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.24/0.28 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.24/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/0.28 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------