%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEV169^5 : 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 : n014.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 08:36:13 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.08s 0.31s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.08s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 9 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 29 ( 28 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 90 ( 5 ~; 0 |; 13 &; 69 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 42 ( 42 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 102 ( 94 ^; 8 !; 0 ?; 102 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
esk1_0: ( a > a > a ) > a ).
thf(decl_24,type,
esk2_0: ( a > a > a ) > a ).
thf(decl_25,type,
esk1_2: a > a > a ).
thf(cTHM188_pme,conjecture,
! [X1: ( a > a > a ) > a,X2: ( a > a > a ) > a] :
( ( ( X1
= ( ^ [X3: a > a > a] :
( X3
@ ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 )
@ ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 ) ) ) )
& ( X2
= ( ^ [X3: a > a > a] :
( X3
@ ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 )
@ ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 ) ) ) )
& ( ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 )
= ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 ) )
& ( ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 )
= ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 ) ) )
=> ( X1 = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.0l8dbAtkxT/E---3.1_2791905.p',cTHM188_pme) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: ( a > a > a ) > a,X2: ( a > a > a ) > a] :
( ( ( X1
= ( ^ [X3: a > a > a] :
( X3
@ ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 )
@ ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 ) ) ) )
& ( X2
= ( ^ [X3: a > a > a] :
( X3
@ ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 )
@ ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 ) ) ) )
& ( ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 )
= ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X4 ) )
& ( ( X1
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 )
= ( X2
@ ^ [X4: a,X5: a] : X5 ) ) )
=> ( X1 = X2 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM188_pme]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: ( a > a > a ) > a,X2: ( a > a > a ) > a] :
( ( ( X1
= ( ^ [Z0: a > a > a] :
( Z0
@ ( X1
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z1 )
@ ( X1
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z2 ) ) ) )
& ( X2
= ( ^ [Z0: a > a > a] :
( Z0
@ ( X2
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z1 )
@ ( X2
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z2 ) ) ) )
& ( ( X1
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 )
= ( X2
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 ) )
& ( ( X1
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 )
= ( X2
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 ) ) )
=> ( X1 = X2 ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0
= ( ^ [Z0: a > a > a] :
( Z0
@ ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z1 )
@ ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z2 ) ) ) )
& ( esk2_0
= ( ^ [Z0: a > a > a] :
( Z0
@ ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z1 )
@ ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z2 ) ) ) )
& ( ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 )
= ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 ) )
& ( ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 )
= ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 ) )
& ( esk1_0 != esk2_0 ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0
= ( ^ [Z0: a > a > a] :
( Z0
@ ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z1 )
@ ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z2 ) ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 )
= ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 )
= ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( esk2_0
= ( ^ [Z0: a > a > a] :
( Z0
@ ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z1 )
@ ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z1: a,Z2: a] : Z2 ) ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: a > a > a] :
( ( X3
@ ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z0 )
@ ( esk2_0
@ ^ [Z0: a,Z1: a] : Z1 ) )
= ( esk1_0 @ X3 ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]),c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0 @ esk1_2 )
!= ( esk2_0 @ esk1_2 ) ),
inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: a > a > a] :
( ( esk1_0 @ X3 )
= ( esk2_0 @ X3 ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SEV169^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.22 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.22 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.22 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.22 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.22 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.22 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.22 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.22 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 15:18:00 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.22 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.22 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.26 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.28 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.0l8dbAtkxT/E---3.1_2791905.p
% 0.08/0.31 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.08/0.31 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSLNHHA.
% 0.08/0.31 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_ho_10 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting sh5l with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_bool_2 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % new_bool_2 with pid 2791925 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Result found by new_bool_2
% 0.08/0.31 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSLNHHA.
% 0.08/0.31 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_ho_10 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting sh5l with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_bool_2 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.08/0.31 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.08/0.31 % Search class: HUUPF-FFSS00-MHHFFFNN
% 0.08/0.31 % partial match(3): HUHPF-FFSF00-SHHFFFNN
% 0.08/0.31 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_ho_10 with 361s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2791926 completed with status 10
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting sh5l with 61s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % new_ho_10 with pid 2791927 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.08/0.31 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSLNHHA.
% 0.08/0.31 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_ho_10 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting sh5l with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_bool_2 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.08/0.31 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.08/0.31 % Search class: HUUPF-FFSS00-MHHFFFNN
% 0.08/0.31 % partial match(3): HUHPF-FFSF00-SHHFFFNN
% 0.08/0.31 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Starting new_ho_10 with 361s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.31 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.08/0.31 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.08/0.31
% 0.08/0.31 % Proof found!
% 0.08/0.31 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.08/0.31 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.08/0.31 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.08/0.31 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.08/0.31 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.08/0.31 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.08/0.31 % Processed clauses : 13
% 0.08/0.31 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % ...remaining for further processing : 13
% 0.08/0.31 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.08/0.31 % Generated clauses : 4
% 0.08/0.31 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.08/0.31 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % NegExts : 1
% 0.08/0.31 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.08/0.31 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.31 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.31 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.31 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.31 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.31 % Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.08/0.31 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.08/0.31 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.08/0.31 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.31 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.08/0.31 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.08/0.31 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % BW rewrite match attempts : 20
% 0.08/0.31 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.08/0.31 % Condensation attempts : 13
% 0.08/0.31 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.08/0.31 % Termbank termtop insertions : 415
% 0.08/0.31 % Search garbage collected termcells : 76
% 0.08/0.31
% 0.08/0.31 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.31 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.08/0.31 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.08/0.31 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.08/0.31 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.08/0.31
% 0.08/0.31 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.31 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.08/0.31 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.08/0.31 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.08/0.31 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.08/0.31 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------