%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : ITP040^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 08:04:10 AM UTC 2026
% Result : ContradictoryAxioms 0.20s 0.36s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 7 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 13 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 50 ( 6 ~; 2 |; 0 &; 41 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg)
% Number of types : 5 ( 4 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 0 ^; 9 !; 0 ?; 9 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
denota231621370t_unit: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
oDE_a_c: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort3,type,
set_c: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort4,type,
c: $tType ).
thf(decl_25,type,
denota540094197_a_b_c: denota231621370t_unit > oDE_a_c > set_c ).
thf(decl_126,type,
static_FVO_a_c: oDE_a_c > set_c ).
thf(decl_154,type,
member_c: c > set_c > $o ).
thf(decl_155,type,
i: denota231621370t_unit ).
thf(decl_157,type,
oDEa: oDE_a_c ).
thf(decl_164,type,
i2: c ).
thf(conj_2,hypothesis,
~ ( member_c @ i2 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ oDEa ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.nQBddWbsyk/E---3.1_1088056.p',conj_2) ).
thf(fact_0_ode__to__fvo,axiom,
! [X1: c,X2: denota231621370t_unit,X3: oDE_a_c] :
( ( member_c @ X1 @ ( denota540094197_a_b_c @ X2 @ X3 ) )
=> ( member_c @ X1 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ X3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.nQBddWbsyk/E---3.1_1088056.p',fact_0_ode__to__fvo) ).
thf(conj_1,hypothesis,
member_c @ i2 @ ( denota540094197_a_b_c @ i @ oDEa ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.nQBddWbsyk/E---3.1_1088056.p',conj_1) ).
thf(c_0_3,hypothesis,
~ ( member_c @ i2 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ oDEa ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[conj_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,plain,
! [X1043: c,X1044: denota231621370t_unit,X1045: oDE_a_c] :
( ~ ( member_c @ X1043 @ ( denota540094197_a_b_c @ X1044 @ X1045 ) )
| ( member_c @ X1043 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ X1045 ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_0_ode__to__fvo])])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,hypothesis,
~ ( member_c @ i2 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ oDEa ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,plain,
! [X1: c,X2: denota231621370t_unit,X3: oDE_a_c] :
( ( member_c @ X1 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ X3 ) )
| ~ ( member_c @ X1 @ ( denota540094197_a_b_c @ X2 @ X3 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
member_c @ i2 @ ( denota540094197_a_b_c @ i @ oDEa ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[conj_1]) ).
thf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
~ ( member_c @ i2 @ ( static_FVO_a_c @ oDEa ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : ITP040^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.19 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.19 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.19 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.19 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.19 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.19 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.19 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.19 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 19:43:12 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.19 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.19 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.24 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.30 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.nQBddWbsyk/E---3.1_1088056.p
% 0.20/0.36 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.20/0.36 % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSMSSLNHSA.
% 0.20/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting new_bool_8 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting new_ho_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting additional_ho_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting ehoh_best with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting full_lambda_4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % new_bool_8 with pid 1088098 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Result found by new_bool_8
% 0.20/0.36 % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSMSSLNHSA.
% 0.20/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting new_bool_8 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0))
% 0.20/0.36 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.36 % Search class: HGUSM-FFMM31-MHSFFSBN
% 0.20/0.36 % partial match(2): HGUSM-FSLM31-MHSFFSBN
% 0.20/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 55s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting new_bool_8 with 61s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1088105 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.20/0.36 % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSMSSLNHSA.
% 0.20/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting new_bool_8 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0))
% 0.20/0.36 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.36 % Search class: HGUSM-FFMM31-MHSFFSBN
% 0.20/0.36 % partial match(2): HGUSM-FSLM31-MHSFFSBN
% 0.20/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.20/0.36 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 55s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.36 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.36
% 0.20/0.36 % Proof found!
% 0.20/0.36 % SZS status ContradictoryAxioms
% 0.20/0.36 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.36 % Parsed axioms : 547
% 0.20/0.36 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 488
% 0.20/0.36 % Initial clauses : 107
% 0.20/0.36 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 21
% 0.20/0.36 % Initial clauses in saturation : 86
% 0.20/0.36 % Processed clauses : 39
% 0.20/0.36 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.20/0.36 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.20/0.36 % ...remaining for further processing : 33
% 0.20/0.36 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.20/0.36 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.20/0.36 % Generated clauses : 22
% 0.20/0.36 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 12
% 0.20/0.36 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Paramodulations : 16
% 0.20/0.36 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.20/0.36 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Total rewrite steps : 23
% 0.20/0.36 % ...of those cached : 11
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.36 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.36 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.36 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.36 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.36 % Current number of processed clauses : 27
% 0.20/0.36 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 18
% 0.20/0.36 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.20/0.36 % Non-unit-clauses : 6
% 0.20/0.36 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 57
% 0.20/0.36 % ...number of literals in the above : 143
% 0.20/0.36 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.20/0.36 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
% 0.20/0.36 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.20/0.36 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.20/0.36 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.20/0.36 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.36 % Termbank termtop insertions : 16520
% 0.20/0.36 % Search garbage collected termcells : 5356
% 0.20/0.36
% 0.20/0.36 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.36 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.20/0.36 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.36 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.20/0.36 % Maximum resident set size: 5584 pages
% 0.20/0.36
% 0.20/0.36 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.36 % User time : 0.034 s
% 0.20/0.36 % System time : 0.012 s
% 0.20/0.36 % Total time : 0.046 s
% 0.20/0.36 % Maximum resident set size: 6144 pages
% 0.20/0.36 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------