%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : ITP010^4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 08:05:11 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 12.83s 10.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 12.83s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 6 ( 4 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 8 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 62 ( 8 ~; 0 |; 0 &; 52 @)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 16 ( 7 avg)
% Number of types : 4 ( 3 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 0 ^; 12 !; 0 ?; 12 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
d: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
u: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort3,type,
du: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
tyop_2Emin_2Ebool: d ).
thf(decl_24,type,
tyop_2Emin_2Efun: d > d > d ).
thf(decl_25,type,
s: d > u > du ).
thf(decl_57,type,
j_mono_2Etyop_2Emin_2Ebool: du > $o ).
thf(decl_3846,type,
c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq_2E2: du > du > u ).
thf(thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE,conjecture,
! [X1: d,X2: d,X468: u,X85: u] :
( ~ ( j_mono_2Etyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( s @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq_2E2 @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X1 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X468 ) @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X2 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X85 ) ) ) )
<=> ~ ( j_mono_2Etyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( s @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq_2E2 @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X1 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X468 ) @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X2 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X85 ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.E07uQ0yQQM/E---3.1_3097348.p',thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: d,X2: d,X468: u,X85: u] :
( ~ ( j_mono_2Etyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( s @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq_2E2 @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X1 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X468 ) @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X2 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X85 ) ) ) )
<=> ~ ( j_mono_2Etyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( s @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool @ ( c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq_2E2 @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X1 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X468 ) @ ( s @ ( tyop_2Emin_2Efun @ X2 @ tyop_2Emin_2Ebool ) @ X85 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: d,X2: d,X468: u,X85: u] : $true,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ $true,
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ $true,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : ITP010^4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.20 % Computer : n014.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 19:25:16 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.21 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.21 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.25 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 8.07/8.17 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.E07uQ0yQQM/E---3.1_3097348.p
% 12.83/10.60 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 12.83/10.60 % partial match(2): HMLMSLSLSSSCHFA
% 12.83/10.60 % Preprocessing class: HMLLSLLLSSSCHFA.
% 12.83/10.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting new_ho_2 with 1196s (4) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting sh3l with 598s (2) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting lpo5_rw_fix with 299s (1) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting full_lambda_7 with 299s (1) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % lpo5_rw_fix with pid 3097694 completed with status 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Result found by lpo5_rw_fix
% 12.83/10.60 % partial match(2): HMLMSLSLSSSCHFA
% 12.83/10.60 % Preprocessing class: HMLLSLLLSSSCHFA.
% 12.83/10.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting new_ho_2 with 1196s (4) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting sh3l with 598s (2) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting lpo5_rw_fix with 299s (1) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000)
% 12.83/10.60 % SinE strategy is gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 12.83/10.60 % Search class: HGHSM-SMLM33-DHFFFFBC
% 12.83/10.60 % partial match(1): HGHSM-SMLM32-DHFFFFBC
% 12.83/10.60 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 299 seconds (299 total)
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3097696 completed with status 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 12.83/10.60 % partial match(2): HMLMSLSLSSSCHFA
% 12.83/10.60 % Preprocessing class: HMLLSLLLSSSCHFA.
% 12.83/10.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting new_ho_2 with 1196s (4) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting sh3l with 598s (2) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting lpo5_rw_fix with 299s (1) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000)
% 12.83/10.60 % SinE strategy is gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 12.83/10.60 % Search class: HGHSM-SMLM33-DHFFFFBC
% 12.83/10.60 % partial match(1): HGHSM-SMLM32-DHFFFFBC
% 12.83/10.60 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 299 seconds (299 total)
% 12.83/10.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 12.83/10.60 % Preprocessing time : 0.110 s
% 12.83/10.60
% 12.83/10.60 % Proof found!
% 12.83/10.60 % SZS status Theorem
% 12.83/10.60 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 12.83/10.60 % Parsed axioms : 25243
% 12.83/10.60 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 24242
% 12.83/10.60 % Initial clauses : 2196
% 12.83/10.60 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 204
% 12.83/10.60 % Initial clauses in saturation : 1992
% 12.83/10.60 % Processed clauses : 1
% 12.83/10.60 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % ...subsumed : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % ...remaining for further processing : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Generated clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Paramodulations : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Factorizations : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % NegExts : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % ...of those cached : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional check models : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 12.83/10.60 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 12.83/10.60 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 12.83/10.60 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 12.83/10.60 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 12.83/10.60 % Current number of processed clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1991
% 12.83/10.60 % ...number of literals in the above : 4988
% 12.83/10.60 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Condensation successes : 0
% 12.83/10.60 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1312489
% 12.83/10.60 % Search garbage collected termcells : 270524
% 12.83/10.60
% 12.83/10.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 12.83/10.60 % User time : 0.763 s
% 12.83/10.60 % System time : 0.143 s
% 12.83/10.60 % Total time : 0.906 s
% 12.83/10.60 % Maximum resident set size: 64388 pages
% 12.83/10.60
% 12.83/10.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 12.83/10.60 % User time : 2.199 s
% 12.83/10.60 % System time : 0.191 s
% 12.83/10.60 % Total time : 2.390 s
% 12.83/10.60 % Maximum resident set size: 56064 pages
% 12.83/10.60 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------