%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : ITP071^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n006.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 08:05:26 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.41s 0.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.41s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 14 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 14 ( 6 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 63 ( 4 ~; 0 |; 0 &; 59 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 4 ( 3 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 9 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 0 ^; 9 !; 0 ?; 9 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
produc143150363Tree_a: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
tree_a: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort3,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_57,type,
heapIm837449470Leaf_a: tree_a > produc143150363Tree_a ).
thf(decl_62,type,
e_a: tree_a ).
thf(decl_63,type,
t_a: a > tree_a > tree_a > tree_a ).
thf(decl_65,type,
is_heap_a: tree_a > $o ).
thf(decl_82,type,
produc686083979Tree_a: a > tree_a > produc143150363Tree_a ).
thf(decl_121,type,
product_snd_a_Tree_a: produc143150363Tree_a > tree_a ).
thf(decl_136,type,
v: a ).
thf(conj_0,conjecture,
is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.QWlWpOSuBm/E---3.1_1221734.p',conj_0) ).
thf(fact_16_removeLeaf_Osimps_I1_J,axiom,
! [X11: a] :
( ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ X11 @ e_a @ e_a ) )
= ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X11 @ e_a ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.QWlWpOSuBm/E---3.1_1221734.p',fact_16_removeLeaf_Osimps_I1_J) ).
thf(fact_29_snd__conv,axiom,
! [X32: a,X33: tree_a] :
( ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X32 @ X33 ) )
= X33 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.QWlWpOSuBm/E---3.1_1221734.p',fact_29_snd__conv) ).
thf(fact_10_is__heap_Osimps_I1_J,axiom,
is_heap_a @ e_a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.QWlWpOSuBm/E---3.1_1221734.p',fact_10_is__heap_Osimps_I1_J) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_0]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
! [X1573: a] :
( ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ X1573 @ e_a @ e_a ) )
= ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X1573 @ e_a ) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[fact_16_removeLeaf_Osimps_I1_J]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
! [X1478: a,X1479: tree_a] :
( ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X1478 @ X1479 ) )
= X1479 ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[fact_29_snd__conv]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X2: a] :
( ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ X2 @ e_a @ e_a ) )
= ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X2 @ e_a ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
! [X2: a,X1: tree_a] :
( ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X2 @ X1 ) )
= X1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_12,plain,
is_heap_a @ e_a,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[fact_10_is__heap_Osimps_I1_J]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : ITP071^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.19 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.19 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.19 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.19 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.19 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.20 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.20 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.20 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 19:46:24 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.20 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.20 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.24 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.30 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.QWlWpOSuBm/E---3.1_1221734.p
% 0.41/0.40 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.41/0.40 % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSSSSLCHFA.
% 0.41/0.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting lpo8_s with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % lpo8_s with pid 1221749 completed with status 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Result found by lpo8_s
% 0.41/0.40 % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSSSSLCHFA.
% 0.41/0.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting lpo8_s with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,4.0,,6,20000,1.0))
% 0.41/0.40 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,4.0,,6,20000,1.0)
% 0.41/0.40 % Search class: HGUSM-FSLS32-MHFFFMBN
% 0.41/0.40 % partial match(2): HGUSM-FSLM32-MHFFFSBN
% 0.41/0.40 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1221752 completed with status 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.41/0.40 % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSSSSLCHFA.
% 0.41/0.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting lpo8_s with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,4.0,,6,20000,1.0))
% 0.41/0.40 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,4.0,,6,20000,1.0)
% 0.41/0.40 % Search class: HGUSM-FSLS32-MHFFFMBN
% 0.41/0.40 % partial match(2): HGUSM-FSLM32-MHFFFSBN
% 0.41/0.40 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.41/0.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40 % Preprocessing time : 0.007 s
% 0.41/0.40
% 0.41/0.40 % Proof found!
% 0.41/0.40 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.41/0.40 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.41/0.40 % Parsed axioms : 484
% 0.41/0.40 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 298
% 0.41/0.40 % Initial clauses : 648
% 0.41/0.40 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 14
% 0.41/0.40 % Initial clauses in saturation : 634
% 0.41/0.40 % Processed clauses : 215
% 0.41/0.40 % ...of these trivial : 15
% 0.41/0.40 % ...subsumed : 52
% 0.41/0.40 % ...remaining for further processing : 148
% 0.41/0.40 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 19
% 0.41/0.40 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.41/0.40 % Backward-rewritten : 10
% 0.41/0.40 % Generated clauses : 260
% 0.41/0.40 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 172
% 0.41/0.40 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Paramodulations : 226
% 0.41/0.40 % Factorizations : 6
% 0.41/0.40 % NegExts : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Equation resolutions : 22
% 0.41/0.40 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Total rewrite steps : 120
% 0.41/0.40 % ...of those cached : 73
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40 % Current number of processed clauses : 123
% 0.41/0.40 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 47
% 0.41/0.40 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.41/0.40 % Non-unit-clauses : 69
% 0.41/0.40 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 584
% 0.41/0.40 % ...number of literals in the above : 2747
% 0.41/0.40 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Current number of archived clauses : 14
% 0.41/0.40 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1859
% 0.41/0.40 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1666
% 0.41/0.40 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 46
% 0.41/0.40 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 134
% 0.41/0.40 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % BW rewrite match attempts : 346
% 0.41/0.40 % BW rewrite match successes : 11
% 0.41/0.40 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.41/0.40 % Termbank termtop insertions : 60806
% 0.41/0.40 % Search garbage collected termcells : 13255
% 0.41/0.40
% 0.41/0.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.41/0.40 % User time : 0.061 s
% 0.41/0.40 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.41/0.40 % Total time : 0.072 s
% 0.41/0.40 % Maximum resident set size: 7300 pages
% 0.41/0.40
% 0.41/0.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.41/0.40 % User time : 0.070 s
% 0.41/0.40 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.41/0.40 % Total time : 0.085 s
% 0.41/0.40 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.41/0.40 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------