%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO237^5 : 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 : n026.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 08:44:03 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.11s 0.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 6 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 22 ( 7 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 48 ( 6 ~; 0 |; 3 &; 30 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 9 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 8 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 4 ^; 5 !; 0 ?; 9 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
g: $i > $i ).
thf(decl_24,type,
p: ( $i > $i ) > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
x: $i ).
thf(decl_26,type,
q: $i > $o ).
thf(decl_27,type,
f: $i > $i ).
thf(decl_28,type,
esk1_0: $i ).
thf(cTHM508,conjecture,
( ! [X1: $i] :
( ( f @ X1 )
= ( g @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( p
@ ^ [X1: $i] : ( f @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( q @ x )
=> ( p
@ ^ [X1: $i] : ( g @ X1 ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.oh3CrfTsVv/E---3.1_846643.p',cTHM508) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X1: $i] :
( ( f @ X1 )
= ( g @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( p
@ ^ [X1: $i] : ( f @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( q @ x )
=> ( p
@ ^ [X1: $i] : ( g @ X1 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM508]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X1: $i] :
( ( f @ X1 )
= ( g @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( p @ f )
=> ( ( q @ x )
=> ( p @ g ) ) ) ),
inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i] :
( ( ( f @ X3 )
= ( g @ X3 ) )
& ( p @ f )
& ( q @ x )
& ~ ( p @ g ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ( p @ g ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
p @ f,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,plain,
f != g,
inference(ext_sup,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
( ( f @ esk1_0 )
!= ( g @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( f @ X1 )
= ( g @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_9,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYO237^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.19 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.19 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.19 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.19 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.19 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.20 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.20 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.20 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 16:43:27 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.20 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.20 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.24 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.26 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.oh3CrfTsVv/E---3.1_846643.p
% 0.11/0.28 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.11/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNSSN.
% 0.11/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best8_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting ho_unfolding_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % sh2lt with pid 846659 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Result found by sh2lt
% 0.11/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNSSN.
% 0.11/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best8_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.11/0.28 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.11/0.28 % Search class: HUUSF-FFSF11-SSSFFFNN
% 0.11/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % SubtermCWHack with pid 846661 completed with status 10
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % sh2lt with pid 846668 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Result found by sh2lt
% 0.11/0.28 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNSSN.
% 0.11/0.28 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting ehoh_best8_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.11/0.28 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.11/0.28 % Search class: HUUSF-FFSF11-SSSFFFNN
% 0.11/0.28 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % SubtermCWHack with pid 846661 completed with status 10
% 0.11/0.28 % Starting sh2lt with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.28 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.28 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.11/0.28
% 0.11/0.28 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.28 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/0.28 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.28 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.11/0.28 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 5
% 0.11/0.28 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.11/0.28 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.11/0.28 % Processed clauses : 10
% 0.11/0.28 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.11/0.28 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.11/0.28 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.11/0.28 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.11/0.28 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % NegExts : 1
% 0.11/0.28 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.11/0.28 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.28 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.28 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.28 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.28 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.28 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.11/0.28 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.11/0.28 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.11/0.28 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.28 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.11/0.28 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.11/0.28 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.11/0.28 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.11/0.28 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.28 % Termbank termtop insertions : 215
% 0.11/0.28 % Search garbage collected termcells : 55
% 0.11/0.28
% 0.11/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.28 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.11/0.28 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.11/0.28 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.11/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.11/0.28
% 0.11/0.28 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.28 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.11/0.28 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.11/0.28 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.11/0.28 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.28 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------