%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO154^5 : 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 : n005.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 08:43:55 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.08s 0.29s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.08s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 5 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 27 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 60 ( 9 ~; 4 |; 7 &; 34 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 5 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 6 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 0 ^; 12 !; 2 ?; 14 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
cR: $i > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
g: $i > $i ).
thf(decl_25,type,
cQ: $i > $o ).
thf(decl_26,type,
f: $i > $i ).
thf(decl_27,type,
cP: $i > $o ).
thf(decl_28,type,
a: $i ).
thf(cDEMO_TRIV1,conjecture,
( ( ( cP @ a )
& ! [X1: $i] :
( ( cP @ X1 )
=> ( cQ @ ( f @ X1 ) ) )
& ! [X2: $i] :
( ( cQ @ X2 )
=> ( cR @ ( g @ X2 ) ) ) )
=> ? [X3: $i] : ( cR @ X3 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.xiEZiMvqYB/E---3.1_1886622.p',cDEMO_TRIV1) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ( cP @ a )
& ! [X1: $i] :
( ( cP @ X1 )
=> ( cQ @ ( f @ X1 ) ) )
& ! [X2: $i] :
( ( cQ @ X2 )
=> ( cR @ ( g @ X2 ) ) ) )
=> ? [X3: $i] : ( cR @ X3 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cDEMO_TRIV1]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X7: $i,X8: $i,X9: $i] :
( ( cP @ a )
& ( ~ ( cP @ X7 )
| ( cQ @ ( f @ X7 ) ) )
& ( ~ ( cQ @ X8 )
| ( cR @ ( g @ X8 ) ) )
& ~ ( cR @ X9 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( cR @ ( g @ X1 ) )
| ~ ( cQ @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
~ ( cR @ X1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( cQ @ ( f @ X1 ) )
| ~ ( cP @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
~ ( cQ @ X1 ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
cP @ a,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
~ ( cP @ X1 ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYO154^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.21 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.21 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.21 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.21 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.21 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.21 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.21 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.21 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 16:35:31 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.22 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.22 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.26 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.27 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.xiEZiMvqYB/E---3.1_1886622.p
% 0.08/0.29 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.08/0.29 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.29 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % new_ho_10 with pid 1886639 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.08/0.29 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.29 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.29 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.29 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.29 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting new_ho_10 with 901s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting sh5l with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting new_bool_1 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting new_bool_2 with 146s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1886643 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.08/0.29 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.29 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.29 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.29 % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.29 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.08/0.29 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.29 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.08/0.29
% 0.08/0.29 % Proof found!
% 0.08/0.29 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.08/0.29 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.08/0.29 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.08/0.29 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Initial clauses : 10
% 0.08/0.29 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.08/0.29 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.08/0.29 % Processed clauses : 4
% 0.08/0.29 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % ...remaining for further processing : 4
% 0.08/0.29 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Generated clauses : 1
% 0.08/0.29 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % NegExts : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.29 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.29 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.29 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.29 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.29 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.08/0.29 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.08/0.29 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.29 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.08/0.29 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.08/0.29 % Termbank termtop insertions : 375
% 0.08/0.29 % Search garbage collected termcells : 111
% 0.08/0.29
% 0.08/0.29 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.29 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.08/0.29 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.08/0.29 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.08/0.29 % Maximum resident set size: 3884 pages
% 0.08/0.29
% 0.08/0.29 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.29 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.08/0.29 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.08/0.29 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.08/0.29 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.08/0.29 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------