%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : ITP144^1 : 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 : n016.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 08:04:29 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.29s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 3 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 23 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 105 ( 19 ~; 18 |; 4 &; 60 @)
% ( 2 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 6 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 3 ( 3 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 6 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 0 ^; 14 !; 2 ?; 16 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_27,type,
hilbert_Eps_b: ( b > $o ) > b ).
thf(decl_43,type,
p: a > $o ).
thf(decl_44,type,
q: a > b > $o ).
thf(decl_45,type,
esk1_0: a ).
thf(decl_46,type,
esk2_1: a > b ).
thf(decl_48,type,
esk4_2: ( b > $o ) > $o > b ).
thf(conj_1,conjecture,
! [X107: a] :
( ~ ( p @ X107 )
| ( q @ X107 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ ( q @ X107 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.fZbqEugV31/E---3.1_839649.p',conj_1) ).
thf(fact_3_verit__sko__ex_H,axiom,
! [X1: b > $o,X8: $o] :
( ( ( X1 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ X1 ) )
<=> X8 )
=> ( ? [X9: b] : ( X1 @ X9 )
<=> X8 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.fZbqEugV31/E---3.1_839649.p',fact_3_verit__sko__ex_H) ).
thf(conj_0,hypothesis,
! [X105: a] :
( ( p @ X105 )
=> ? [X106: b] : ( q @ X105 @ X106 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.fZbqEugV31/E---3.1_839649.p',conj_0) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X107: a] :
( ~ ( p @ X107 )
| ( q @ X107 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ ( q @ X107 ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_1]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X107: a] :
( ~ ( p @ X107 )
| ( q @ X107 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ ( q @ X107 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ( p @ esk1_0 )
& ~ ( q @ esk1_0 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ ( q @ esk1_0 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_6,plain,
! [X198: b > $o,X199: $o,X200: b] :
( ( ~ ( X198 @ X200 )
| X199
| ~ ( X198 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ X198 ) )
| ~ X199 )
& ( ~ X199
| ( X198 @ ( esk4_2 @ X198 @ X199 ) )
| ~ ( X198 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ X198 ) )
| ~ X199 )
& ( ~ ( X198 @ X200 )
| X199
| ( X198 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ X198 ) )
| X199 )
& ( ~ X199
| ( X198 @ ( esk4_2 @ X198 @ X199 ) )
| ( X198 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ X198 ) )
| X199 ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_3_verit__sko__ex_H])])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ( q @ esk1_0 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ ( q @ esk1_0 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
! [X1: b > $o,X2: b] :
( ( X1 @ ( hilbert_Eps_b @ X1 ) )
| ~ ( X1 @ X2 ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])]) ).
thf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
! [X191: a] :
( ~ ( p @ X191 )
| ( q @ X191 @ ( esk2_1 @ X191 ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[conj_0])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
! [X2: b] :
~ ( q @ esk1_0 @ X2 ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(choice_inst,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
! [X105: a] :
( ( q @ X105 @ ( esk2_1 @ X105 ) )
| ~ ( p @ X105 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
p @ esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : ITP144^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.18 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.18 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.18 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.18 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.18 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.18 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.18 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.19 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 20:05:11 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.19 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.19 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.23 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.26 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.fZbqEugV31/E---3.1_839649.p
% 0.24/0.28 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.24/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSLSSMSSSSLCHSA.
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting sh2 with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best7_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting post_as_ho9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting almost_fo_4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % post_as_ho9 with pid 839665 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.28 % Result found by post_as_ho9
% 0.24/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSLSSMSSSSLCHSA.
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting sh2 with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best7_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % Starting post_as_ho9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1,0,2,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.24/0.28 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1,0,2,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.24/0.28 % Search class: HGHSS-FFMF31-MHSFFMBC
% 0.24/0.28 % partial match(3): HGHSS-FFMF21-MSSFFMBN
% 0.24/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.29 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29 % SubtermCWHack with pid 839667 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.29 % Preprocessing class: HSLSSMSSSSLCHSA.
% 0.24/0.29 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.29 % Starting sh2 with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.24/0.29 % Starting full_lambda_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29 % Starting ehoh_best7_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29 % Starting post_as_ho9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1,0,2,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.24/0.29 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1,0,2,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.24/0.29 % Search class: HGHSS-FFMF31-MHSFFMBC
% 0.24/0.29 % partial match(3): HGHSS-FFMF21-MSSFFMBN
% 0.24/0.29 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.29 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.29
% 0.24/0.29 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.29 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.29 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.29 % Parsed axioms : 138
% 0.24/0.29 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 106
% 0.24/0.29 % Initial clauses : 60
% 0.24/0.29 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.24/0.29 % Initial clauses in saturation : 54
% 0.24/0.29 % Processed clauses : 19
% 0.24/0.29 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % ...subsumed : 8
% 0.24/0.29 % ...remaining for further processing : 11
% 0.24/0.29 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% 0.24/0.29 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.24/0.29 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Generated clauses : 9
% 0.24/0.29 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 7
% 0.24/0.29 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.24/0.29 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Equation resolutions : 3
% 0.24/0.29 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.24/0.29 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29 % Current number of processed clauses : 7
% 0.24/0.29 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.29 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.29 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.24/0.29 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 41
% 0.24/0.29 % ...number of literals in the above : 131
% 0.24/0.29 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.29 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5
% 0.24/0.29 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.24/0.29 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 0.24/0.29 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.24/0.29 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.29 % Termbank termtop insertions : 6719
% 0.24/0.29 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2457
% 0.24/0.29
% 0.24/0.29 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.29 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.24/0.29 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.29 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.24/0.29 % Maximum resident set size: 4108 pages
% 0.24/0.29
% 0.24/0.29 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.29 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.24/0.29 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.29 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.24/0.29 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.24/0.29 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------