%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM770^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n013.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 08:17:04 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 0.36s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 10 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 28 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 119 ( 12 ~; 8 |; 0 &; 96 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 7 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 8 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 0 ^; 21 !; 0 ?; 21 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
frac: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
x: frac ).
thf(decl_24,type,
y: frac ).
thf(decl_25,type,
v: frac ).
thf(decl_26,type,
moref: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(decl_27,type,
eq: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(decl_28,type,
pf: frac > frac > frac ).
thf(decl_29,type,
mf: frac > frac > frac ).
thf(satz67e,conjecture,
eq @ v @ ( mf @ x @ y ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.MCkqp5h20e/E---3.1_2059987.p',satz67e) ).
thf(satz67b,axiom,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
( ( eq @ ( pf @ X2 @ X3 ) @ X1 )
=> ( ( eq @ ( pf @ X2 @ X4 ) @ X1 )
=> ( eq @ X3 @ X4 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.MCkqp5h20e/E---3.1_2059987.p',satz67b) ).
thf(satz67c,axiom,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( moref @ X1 @ X2 )
=> ( eq @ ( pf @ X2 @ ( mf @ X1 @ X2 ) ) @ X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.MCkqp5h20e/E---3.1_2059987.p',satz67c) ).
thf(e,axiom,
eq @ ( pf @ y @ v ) @ x,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.MCkqp5h20e/E---3.1_2059987.p',e) ).
thf(m,axiom,
moref @ x @ y,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.MCkqp5h20e/E---3.1_2059987.p',m) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ( eq @ v @ ( mf @ x @ y ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz67e]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ( eq @ v @ ( mf @ x @ y ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
! [X11: frac,X12: frac,X13: frac,X14: frac] :
( ~ ( eq @ ( pf @ X12 @ X13 ) @ X11 )
| ~ ( eq @ ( pf @ X12 @ X14 ) @ X11 )
| ( eq @ X13 @ X14 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz67b])])]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
! [X15: frac,X16: frac] :
( ~ ( moref @ X15 @ X16 )
| ( eq @ ( pf @ X16 @ ( mf @ X15 @ X16 ) ) @ X15 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz67c])])]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ( eq @ v @ ( mf @ x @ y ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X4: frac,X3: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ X4 )
| ~ ( eq @ ( pf @ X1 @ X2 ) @ X3 )
| ~ ( eq @ ( pf @ X1 @ X4 ) @ X3 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ ( pf @ X2 @ ( mf @ X1 @ X2 ) ) @ X1 )
| ~ ( moref @ X1 @ X2 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ ( eq @ v @ ( mf @ x @ y ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
thf(c_0_13,plain,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X3: frac] :
( ( eq @ X1 @ ( mf @ X2 @ X3 ) )
| ~ ( eq @ ( pf @ X3 @ X1 ) @ X2 )
| ~ ( moref @ X2 @ X3 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_14,plain,
eq @ ( pf @ y @ v ) @ x,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[e]) ).
thf(c_0_15,plain,
moref @ x @ y,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m]) ).
thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : NUM770^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.25 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.25 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.25 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.25 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.25 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.25 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.25 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.25 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 12:54:21 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.26 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.26 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.32 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.33 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.MCkqp5h20e/E---3.1_2059987.p
% 0.23/0.36 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.23/0.36 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.36 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % ho_unfolding_6 with pid 2060001 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.23/0.36 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.36 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.36 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.36 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2060004 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.36 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.36 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.36 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.36 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.36 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.36 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.36 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.23/0.36
% 0.23/0.36 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.36 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.36 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.36 % Parsed axioms : 13
% 0.23/0.36 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Initial clauses : 13
% 0.23/0.36 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 8
% 0.23/0.36 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.23/0.36 % Processed clauses : 9
% 0.23/0.36 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % ...remaining for further processing : 9
% 0.23/0.36 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.23/0.36 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.23/0.36 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Paramodulations : 6
% 0.23/0.36 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.23/0.36 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.36 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.36 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.36 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.36 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.36 % Current number of processed clauses : 9
% 0.23/0.36 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.36 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/0.36 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.36 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.36 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.23/0.36 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/0.36 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.36 % Termbank termtop insertions : 543
% 0.23/0.36 % Search garbage collected termcells : 60
% 0.23/0.36
% 0.23/0.36 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.36 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.36 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.36 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.23/0.36 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.23/0.36
% 0.23/0.36 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.36 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.23/0.36 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.23/0.36 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.23/0.36 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.23/0.36 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------