%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEV285^5 : 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 : n006.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 08:35:19 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.07s 0.26s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.07s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 7 ( 4 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 10 ( 9 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 17 ( 4 ~; 0 |; 1 &; 10 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 4 ( 4 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 8 ( 0 ^; 8 !; 0 ?; 8 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
esk1_0: a > b ).
thf(decl_24,type,
esk2_0: a > b ).
thf(decl_25,type,
esk3_0: a ).
thf(cEE_eq_,conjecture,
! [X1: a > b,X2: a > b] :
( ! [X3: a] :
( ( X1 @ X3 )
= ( X2 @ X3 ) )
=> ( X1 = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.hR3elkeYLQ/E---3.1_867597.p',cEE_eq_) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: a > b,X2: a > b] :
( ! [X3: a] :
( ( X1 @ X3 )
= ( X2 @ X3 ) )
=> ( X1 = X2 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cEE_eq_]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X9: a] :
( ( ( esk1_0 @ X9 )
= ( esk2_0 @ X9 ) )
& ( esk1_0 != esk2_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,
esk1_0 != esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk2_0 @ esk3_0 )
!= ( esk1_0 @ esk3_0 ) ),
inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: a] :
( ( esk1_0 @ X3 )
= ( esk2_0 @ X3 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEV285^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.18 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.18 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.18 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.18 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.18 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.18 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.18 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.07/0.18 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 15:30:54 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.19 % CPUTime :
% 0.07/0.19 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.23 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.07/0.24 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.hR3elkeYLQ/E---3.1_867597.p
% 0.07/0.26 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.07/0.26 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.07/0.26 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % new_bool_9 with pid 867625 completed with status 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Result found by new_bool_9
% 0.07/0.26 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.07/0.26 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0))
% 0.07/0.26 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.07/0.26 % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF00-SSSFFFNN
% 0.07/0.26 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % SubtermCWHack with pid 867633 completed with status 10
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting new_ho_10 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % new_ho_10 with pid 867640 completed with status 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.07/0.26 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.07/0.26 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0))
% 0.07/0.26 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.07/0.26 % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF00-SSSFFFNN
% 0.07/0.26 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % SubtermCWHack with pid 867633 completed with status 10
% 0.07/0.26 % Starting new_ho_10 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.26 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.07/0.26 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.07/0.26
% 0.07/0.26 % Proof found!
% 0.07/0.26 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.07/0.26 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.07/0.26 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.07/0.26 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.07/0.26 % Initial clauses : 2
% 0.07/0.26 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.07/0.26 % Processed clauses : 5
% 0.07/0.26 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.07/0.26 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % Generated clauses : 2
% 0.07/0.26 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % NegExts : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.26 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.26 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.26 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.26 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.26 % Current number of processed clauses : 2
% 0.07/0.26 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.07/0.26 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.07/0.26 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.07/0.26 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.07/0.26 % Condensation attempts : 5
% 0.07/0.26 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.07/0.26 % Termbank termtop insertions : 123
% 0.07/0.26 % Search garbage collected termcells : 47
% 0.07/0.26
% 0.07/0.26 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.07/0.26 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.07/0.26 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.07/0.26 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.07/0.26 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.07/0.26
% 0.07/0.26 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.07/0.26 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.07/0.26 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.07/0.26 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.07/0.26 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.07/0.26 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------