%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEV091^5 : 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 : n001.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 08:34:51 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.29s 0.27s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.29s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEV091^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.19 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.19 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.19 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.19 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.19 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.19 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.19 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.19 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 15:15:37 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.19 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.19 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.23 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.25 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.30ArsvLylx/E---3.1_1368754.p
% 0.29/0.27 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.29/0.27 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.27 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % ho_unfolding_6 with pid 1368779 completed with status 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.29/0.27 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.27 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.29/0.27 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.29/0.27 % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.29/0.27 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1368783 completed with status 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.29/0.27 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.27 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.29/0.27 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.29/0.27 % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.29/0.27 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.29/0.27 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.27 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.29/0.27
% 0.29/0.27 % Proof found!
% 0.29/0.27 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.29/0.27 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_23, type, cQ: $i > $i > $o).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_24, type, cP: $i > $i > $o).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_25, type, epred1_0: $o).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_26, type, esk1_0: $i).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_27, type, esk2_0: $i).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_28, type, esk3_0: $i).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(decl_29, type, esk4_0: $i).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(cCADE13_pme, conjecture, ((((![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cP @ X1 @ X2)&(cP @ X2 @ X3))=>(cP @ X1 @ X3)))&![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cQ @ X1 @ X2)&(cQ @ X2 @ X3))=>(cQ @ X1 @ X3))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)=>(cQ @ X2 @ X1))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|(cQ @ X1 @ X2))))=>(![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cP @ X1 @ X2))|![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cQ @ X1 @ X2)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.30ArsvLylx/E---3.1_1368754.p', cCADE13_pme)).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_1, plain, ((epred1_0)<=>(((![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cP @ X1 @ X2)&(cP @ X2 @ X3))=>(cP @ X1 @ X3)))&![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cQ @ X1 @ X2)&(cQ @ X2 @ X3))=>(cQ @ X1 @ X3))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)=>(cQ @ X2 @ X1))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|(cQ @ X1 @ X2))))), introduced(definition)).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ~(((((![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cP @ X1 @ X2)&(cP @ X2 @ X3))=>(cP @ X1 @ X3)))&![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cQ @ X1 @ X2)&(cQ @ X2 @ X3))=>(cQ @ X1 @ X3))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)=>(cQ @ X2 @ X1))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|(cQ @ X1 @ X2))))=>(![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cP @ X1 @ X2))|![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cQ @ X1 @ X2))))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cCADE13_pme])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_3, plain, ((epred1_0)=>(((![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cP @ X1 @ X2)&(cP @ X2 @ X3))=>(cP @ X1 @ X3)))&![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((cQ @ X1 @ X2)&(cQ @ X2 @ X3))=>(cQ @ X1 @ X3))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)=>(cQ @ X2 @ X1))))&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|(cQ @ X1 @ X2))))), inference(split_equiv,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ~(((epred1_0)=>(![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cP @ X1 @ X2))|![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cQ @ X1 @ X2))))), inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[c_0_2, c_0_1])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_5, plain, ![X22:$i, X23:$i, X24:$i, X25:$i, X26:$i, X27:$i, X28:$i, X29:$i, X30:$i, X31:$i]:(((((~(cP @ X22 @ X23)|~(cP @ X23 @ X24)|(cP @ X22 @ X24)|~(epred1_0))&(~(cQ @ X25 @ X26)|~(cQ @ X26 @ X27)|(cQ @ X25 @ X27)|~(epred1_0)))&(~(cQ @ X28 @ X29)|(cQ @ X29 @ X28)|~(epred1_0)))&((cP @ X30 @ X31)|(cQ @ X30 @ X31)|~(epred1_0)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ((epred1_0)&(~(cP @ esk1_0 @ esk2_0)&~(cQ @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0))), inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_7, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X3)|~((cP @ X1 @ X2))|~((cP @ X2 @ X3))|~((epred1_0)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, (epred1_0), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_9, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|(cQ @ X1 @ X2)|~((epred1_0)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_10, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|~((cP @ X3 @ X2))|~((cP @ X1 @ X3)))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7, c_0_8])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_11, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cP @ X1 @ X2)|(cQ @ X1 @ X2))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9, c_0_8])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_12, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cQ @ X2 @ X1)|~((cQ @ X1 @ X2))|~((epred1_0)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ~((cP @ esk1_0 @ esk2_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_14, plain, ![X3:$i, X2:$i, X1:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)|(cP @ X3 @ X2)|~((cP @ X3 @ X1)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10, c_0_11])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_15, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X3)|~((cQ @ X1 @ X2))|~((cQ @ X2 @ X3))|~((epred1_0)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_16, plain, ![X2:$i, X1:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)|~((cQ @ X2 @ X1)))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12, c_0_8])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_17, negated_conjecture, (cQ @ esk1_0 @ esk2_0), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13, c_0_11])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_18, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)|(cP @ X1 @ X3)|(cQ @ X2 @ X3))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14, c_0_11])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_19, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i, X3:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ X2)|~((cQ @ X3 @ X2))|~((cQ @ X1 @ X3)))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15, c_0_8])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_20, negated_conjecture, (cQ @ esk2_0 @ esk1_0), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_17])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_21, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ esk2_0)|(cQ @ esk1_0 @ X1))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13, c_0_18])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_22, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:(((cQ @ X1 @ esk1_0)|~((cQ @ X1 @ esk2_0)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19, c_0_20])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_23, plain, ![X1:$i]:((cQ @ X1 @ esk1_0)), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_21]), c_0_22])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_24, plain, ![X1:$i]:((cQ @ esk1_0 @ X1)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_23])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, ~((cQ @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_26, plain, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cQ @ X1 @ X2)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19, c_0_24]), c_0_23])])).
% 0.29/0.27 thf(c_0_27, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_25, c_0_26])]), ['proof']).
% 0.29/0.27 % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.29/0.27 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.29/0.27 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.29/0.27 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.29/0.27 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.29/0.27 % Processed clauses : 26
% 0.29/0.27 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.29/0.27 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.29/0.27 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.29/0.27 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.29/0.27 % Backward-rewritten : 17
% 0.29/0.27 % Generated clauses : 52
% 0.29/0.27 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 41
% 0.29/0.27 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.29/0.27 % Paramodulations : 50
% 0.29/0.27 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.29/0.27 % NegExts : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Total rewrite steps : 36
% 0.29/0.27 % ...of those cached : 13
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.27 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.27 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.27 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.27 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.27 % Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.29/0.27 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.29/0.27 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.29/0.27 % Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.29/0.27 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
% 0.29/0.27 % ...number of literals in the above : 59
% 0.29/0.27 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Current number of archived clauses : 20
% 0.29/0.27 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 44
% 0.29/0.27 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 42
% 0.29/0.27 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.29/0.27 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 40
% 0.29/0.27 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % BW rewrite match attempts : 17
% 0.29/0.27 % BW rewrite match successes : 17
% 0.29/0.27 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.29/0.27 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1160
% 0.29/0.27 % Search garbage collected termcells : 190
% 0.29/0.27
% 0.29/0.27 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/0.27 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.29/0.27 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.29/0.27 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.29/0.27 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.29/0.27
% 0.29/0.27 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/0.27 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.29/0.27 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.29/0.27 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.29/0.27 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.29/0.27 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------