%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SET027^5 : 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 : n009.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 08:21:52 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 0.33s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 4 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 14 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 50 ( 8 ~; 4 |; 5 &; 25 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 8 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 5 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 6 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 0 ^; 16 !; 0 ?; 16 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
epred1_0: a > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
epred2_0: a > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
epred3_0: a > $o ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk1_0: a ).
thf(cBOOL_PROP_29_pme,conjecture,
! [X1: a > $o,X2: a > $o,X3: a > $o] :
( ( ! [X4: a] :
( ( X1 @ X4 )
=> ( X2 @ X4 ) )
& ! [X4: a] :
( ( X2 @ X4 )
=> ( X3 @ X4 ) ) )
=> ! [X4: a] :
( ( X1 @ X4 )
=> ( X3 @ X4 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.2Qhvg4LL7E/E---3.1_3992145.p',cBOOL_PROP_29_pme) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: a > $o,X2: a > $o,X3: a > $o] :
( ( ! [X4: a] :
( ( X1 @ X4 )
=> ( X2 @ X4 ) )
& ! [X4: a] :
( ( X2 @ X4 )
=> ( X3 @ X4 ) ) )
=> ! [X4: a] :
( ( X1 @ X4 )
=> ( X3 @ X4 ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cBOOL_PROP_29_pme]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X14: a,X15: a] :
( ( ~ ( epred1_0 @ X14 )
| ( epred2_0 @ X14 ) )
& ( ~ ( epred2_0 @ X15 )
| ( epred3_0 @ X15 ) )
& ( epred1_0 @ esk1_0 )
& ~ ( epred3_0 @ esk1_0 ) ),
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,
~ ( epred3_0 @ esk1_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a] :
( ( epred3_0 @ X4 )
| ~ ( epred2_0 @ X4 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ( epred2_0 @ esk1_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: a] :
( ( epred2_0 @ X4 )
| ~ ( epred1_0 @ X4 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
epred1_0 @ esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SET027^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.23 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.23 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.23 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.23 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.23 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.23 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.23 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.23 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 13:36:00 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.24 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.24 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.30 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.31 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.2Qhvg4LL7E/E---3.1_3992145.p
% 0.22/0.33 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.22/0.33 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.22/0.33 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % post_as_ho1 with pid 3992160 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Result found by post_as_ho1
% 0.22/0.33 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.22/0.33 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.22/0.33 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.22/0.33 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF00-SSSFFFNN
% 0.22/0.33 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3992167 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.22/0.33 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.22/0.33 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.22/0.33 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.22/0.33 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF00-SSSFFFNN
% 0.22/0.33 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.33 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.33 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.33
% 0.22/0.33 % Proof found!
% 0.22/0.33 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/0.33 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.33 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.22/0.33 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.22/0.33 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.22/0.33 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.22/0.33 % Processed clauses : 5
% 0.22/0.33 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.22/0.33 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Generated clauses : 2
% 0.22/0.33 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.22/0.33 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.22/0.33 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % NegExts : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.22/0.33 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.33 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.33 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.33 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.33 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.33 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.22/0.33 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.22/0.33 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.22/0.33 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.22/0.33 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.33 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/0.33 % Termbank termtop insertions : 364
% 0.22/0.33 % Search garbage collected termcells : 140
% 0.22/0.33
% 0.22/0.33 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.33 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.22/0.33 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.33 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.22/0.33 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.22/0.33
% 0.22/0.33 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.33 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.22/0.33 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.22/0.33 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.22/0.33 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.22/0.33 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------