%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEV053^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 08:34:47 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 0.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 8 ( 3 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 23 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 98 ( 8 ~; 5 |; 6 &; 75 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 8 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 0 ^; 20 !; 0 ?; 20 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
cF: b > b ).
thf(decl_24,type,
cA: b > a ).
thf(decl_25,type,
cL: a > a > $o ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk1_0: b ).
thf(cTHM89B_pme,conjecture,
( ( ! [X1: a,X2: a,X3: a] :
( ( ( cL @ X1 @ X2 )
& ( cL @ X2 @ X3 ) )
=> ( cL @ X1 @ X3 ) )
& ! [X4: b] : ( cL @ ( cA @ X4 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ X4 ) ) ) )
=> ! [X5: b] : ( cL @ ( cA @ X5 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ ( cF @ X5 ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.aR4L1MHIOe/E---3.1_3475924.p',cTHM89B_pme) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ! [X1: a,X2: a,X3: a] :
( ( ( cL @ X1 @ X2 )
& ( cL @ X2 @ X3 ) )
=> ( cL @ X1 @ X3 ) )
& ! [X4: b] : ( cL @ ( cA @ X4 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ X4 ) ) ) )
=> ! [X5: b] : ( cL @ ( cA @ X5 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ ( cF @ X5 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM89B_pme]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X11: a,X12: a,X13: a,X14: b] :
( ( ~ ( cL @ X11 @ X12 )
| ~ ( cL @ X12 @ X13 )
| ( cL @ X11 @ X13 ) )
& ( cL @ ( cA @ X14 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ X14 ) ) )
& ~ ( cL @ ( cA @ esk1_0 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ ( cF @ 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,
! [X1: a,X2: a,X3: a] :
( ( cL @ X1 @ X3 )
| ~ ( cL @ X1 @ X2 )
| ~ ( cL @ X2 @ X3 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X4: b] : ( cL @ ( cA @ X4 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ X4 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ( cL @ ( cA @ esk1_0 ) @ ( cA @ ( cF @ ( cF @ esk1_0 ) ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: a,X4: b] :
( ( cL @ X1 @ ( cA @ ( cF @ X4 ) ) )
| ~ ( cL @ X1 @ ( cA @ X4 ) ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_4])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEV053^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 15:03:40 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.20 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.20 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.24 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.26 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.aR4L1MHIOe/E---3.1_3475924.p
% 0.23/0.28 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.23/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % ho_unfolding_6 with pid 3475938 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.23/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.28 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.28 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF11-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.28 % partial match(1): HHUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3475942 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.28 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.28 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF11-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.28 % partial match(1): HHUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.28 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.28
% 0.23/0.28 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.28 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.28 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.28 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.23/0.28 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.23/0.28 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.23/0.28 % Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.23/0.28 % Processed clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.28 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % ...remaining for further processing : 4
% 0.23/0.28 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.23/0.28 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.23/0.28 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.23/0.28 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.23/0.28 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.28 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.28 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.28 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.28 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.28 % Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.28 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/0.28 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/0.28 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.23/0.28 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.28 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.28 % Termbank termtop insertions : 439
% 0.23/0.28 % Search garbage collected termcells : 122
% 0.23/0.28
% 0.23/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.28 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.23/0.28 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.28 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.23/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.23/0.28
% 0.23/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.28 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.28 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.23/0.28 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.23/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.23/0.28 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------