%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEV405^5 : 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 08:35:29 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.34s 0.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.34s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 7 ( 6 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 8 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 22 ( 5 ~; 4 |; 1 &; 10 @)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 5 ( 5 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 3 ( 2 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 7 ( 0 ^; 5 !; 2 ?; 7 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
cA: $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
esk1_1: ( $i > $o ) > $i ).
thf(cCOMP1,conjecture,
? [X1: $i > $o] :
! [X2: $i] :
( ( X1 @ X2 )
<=> cA ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.iigcLdnUkM/E---3.1_891620.p',cCOMP1) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1: $i > $o] :
! [X2: $i] :
( ( X1 @ X2 )
<=> cA ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cCOMP1]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X5: $i > $o] :
( ( ~ ( X5 @ ( esk1_1 @ X5 ) )
| ~ cA )
& ( ( X5 @ ( esk1_1 @ X5 ) )
| cA ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[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: $i > $o] :
( ( X1 @ ( esk1_1 @ X1 ) )
| cA ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i > $o] :
( ~ ( X1 @ ( esk1_1 @ X1 ) )
| ~ cA ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
cA,
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(flex_resolve,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5])])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SEV405^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.28 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.28 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.28 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.28 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.13/0.28 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.13/0.28 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.28 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.28 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 15:44:09 UTC 2026
% 0.13/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.29 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.28/0.36 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.28/0.38 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.iigcLdnUkM/E---3.1_891620.p
% 0.34/0.40 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.34/0.40 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.34/0.40 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % post_as_ho2 with pid 891637 completed with status 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Result found by post_as_ho2
% 0.34/0.40 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.34/0.40 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.34/0.40 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.34/0.40 % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.34/0.40 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % SubtermCWHack with pid 891641 completed with status 10
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % post_as_ho2 with pid 891647 completed with status 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Result found by post_as_ho2
% 0.34/0.40 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.34/0.40 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.34/0.40 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.34/0.40 % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.34/0.40 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % SubtermCWHack with pid 891641 completed with status 10
% 0.34/0.40 % Starting post_as_ho2 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.34/0.40 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.34/0.40 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.34/0.40
% 0.34/0.40 % Proof found!
% 0.34/0.40 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.34/0.40 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.34/0.40 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.34/0.40 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Initial clauses : 3
% 0.34/0.40 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.34/0.40 % Processed clauses : 6
% 0.34/0.40 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.34/0.40 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.34/0.40 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.34/0.40 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Paramodulations : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.34/0.40 % NegExts : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.34/0.40 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.34/0.40 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.34/0.40 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.34/0.40 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.34/0.40 % Current number of processed clauses : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.34/0.40 % ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.34/0.40 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.34/0.40 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.34/0.40 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.34/0.40 % Termbank termtop insertions : 253
% 0.34/0.40 % Search garbage collected termcells : 48
% 0.34/0.40
% 0.34/0.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.34/0.40 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.34/0.40 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.34/0.40 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.34/0.40 % Maximum resident set size: 3880 pages
% 0.34/0.40
% 0.34/0.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.34/0.40 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.34/0.40 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.34/0.40 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.34/0.40 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.34/0.41 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------