%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL738^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n007.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 08:12:07 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.27s 0.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 2 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 11 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 111 ( 7 ~; 10 |; 3 &; 85 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 14 ( 8 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 42 ( 42 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 9 ( 8 usr; 1 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 33 ( 0 ^; 21 !; 12 ?; 33 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
epred1_0: ( b > $o ) > b > b > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
epred2_0: ( b > $o ) > b > b > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
epred3_0: b > $o ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk1_1: b > b ).
thf(decl_27,type,
esk2_0: ( b > $o ) > b ).
thf(decl_28,type,
epred4_1: ( ( b > $o ) > b ) > b > $o ).
thf(decl_29,type,
esk3_1: ( ( b > $o ) > b ) > b ).
thf(decl_30,type,
esk4_0: ( b > $o ) > b ).
thf(cX5310_SUB,conjecture,
( ? [X1: ( b > $o ) > b > b > $o,X2: ( b > $o ) > b > b > $o] :
( ! [X3: b > $o] :
? [X4: b] :
! [X5: b] :
( ( X2 @ X3 @ X4 @ X5 )
| ( X1 @ X3 @ X4 @ X5 ) )
=> ? [X6: ( b > $o ) > b] :
! [X3: b > $o,X5: b] :
( ( X2 @ X3 @ ( X6 @ X3 ) @ X5 )
| ( X1 @ X3 @ ( X6 @ X3 ) @ X5 ) ) )
=> ? [X7: ( b > $o ) > b] :
! [X8: b > $o] :
( ? [X9: b] : ( X8 @ X9 )
=> ( X8 @ ( X7 @ X8 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.ZS7UAk14sG/E---3.1_3173005.p',cX5310_SUB) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ? [X1: ( b > $o ) > b > b > $o,X2: ( b > $o ) > b > b > $o] :
( ! [X3: b > $o] :
? [X4: b] :
! [X5: b] :
( ( X2 @ X3 @ X4 @ X5 )
| ( X1 @ X3 @ X4 @ X5 ) )
=> ? [X6: ( b > $o ) > b] :
! [X3: b > $o,X5: b] :
( ( X2 @ X3 @ ( X6 @ X3 ) @ X5 )
| ( X1 @ X3 @ ( X6 @ X3 ) @ X5 ) ) )
=> ? [X7: ( b > $o ) > b] :
! [X8: b > $o] :
( ? [X9: b] : ( X8 @ X9 )
=> ( X8 @ ( X7 @ X8 ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cX5310_SUB]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X24: b,X27: b > $o,X28: b,X29: ( b > $o ) > b] :
( ( ~ ( epred2_0 @ epred3_0 @ X24 @ ( esk1_1 @ X24 ) )
| ( epred2_0 @ X27 @ ( esk2_0 @ X27 ) @ X28 )
| ( epred1_0 @ X27 @ ( esk2_0 @ X27 ) @ X28 ) )
& ( ~ ( epred1_0 @ epred3_0 @ X24 @ ( esk1_1 @ X24 ) )
| ( epred2_0 @ X27 @ ( esk2_0 @ X27 ) @ X28 )
| ( epred1_0 @ X27 @ ( esk2_0 @ X27 ) @ X28 ) )
& ( epred4_1 @ X29 @ ( esk3_1 @ X29 ) )
& ~ ( epred4_1 @ X29 @ ( X29 @ ( epred4_1 @ X29 ) ) ) ),
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)],[c_0_1])])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X6: ( b > $o ) > b] :
~ ( epred4_1 @ X6 @ ( X6 @ ( epred4_1 @ X6 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,plain,
! [X32: b > $o,X33: b] :
( ( X32 @ ( esk4_0 @ X32 ) )
| ~ ( X32 @ X33 ) ),
inference(introduce_choice_axiom,[status(thm)],[]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X6: ( b > $o ) > b,X4: b] :
( ( epred4_1 @ X6 @ ( esk4_0 @ ( epred4_1 @ X6 ) ) )
| ~ ( epred4_1 @ X6 @ X4 ) ),
inference(choice_inst,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X6: ( b > $o ) > b] : ( epred4_1 @ X6 @ ( esk3_1 @ X6 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X6: ( b > $o ) > b] : ( epred4_1 @ X6 @ ( esk4_0 @ ( epred4_1 @ X6 ) ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL738^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.19 % Computer : n007.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 10:13:25 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.20 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.20 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.24 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.25 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.ZS7UAk14sG/E---3.1_3173005.p
% 0.27/0.28 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.27/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.27/0.28 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best3_rw with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % ehoh_best3_rw with pid 3173022 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Result found by ehoh_best3_rw
% 0.27/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.27/0.28 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best3_rw with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000)
% 0.27/0.28 % SinE strategy is gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 0.27/0.28 % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFFBN
% 0.27/0.28 % partial match(1): HGUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFMBN
% 0.27/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3173029 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.27/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.27/0.28 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best3_rw with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000)
% 0.27/0.28 % SinE strategy is gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 0.27/0.28 % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFFBN
% 0.27/0.28 % partial match(1): HGUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFMBN
% 0.27/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.28 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.27/0.28
% 0.27/0.28 % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.28 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.27/0.28 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/0.28 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.27/0.28 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.27/0.28 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.27/0.28 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.27/0.28 % Processed clauses : 4
% 0.27/0.28 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % ...remaining for further processing : 4
% 0.27/0.28 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.27/0.28 % Generated clauses : 4
% 0.27/0.28 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.27/0.28 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.27/0.28 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.27/0.28 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.28 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.28 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.28 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.28 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.28 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.27/0.28 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.27/0.28 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.27/0.28 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.27/0.28 % ...number of literals in the above : 8
% 0.27/0.28 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.27/0.28 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.27/0.28 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.27/0.28 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.28 % Termbank termtop insertions : 604
% 0.27/0.28 % Search garbage collected termcells : 217
% 0.27/0.28
% 0.27/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.28 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.27/0.28 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.27/0.28 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.27/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 3840 pages
% 0.27/0.28
% 0.27/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.28 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.27/0.28 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.27/0.28 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.27/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.27/0.28 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------