%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO371^5 : 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 : n011.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 08:42:50 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 0.32s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 3 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 25 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 31 ( 8 ~; 6 |; 2 &; 8 @)
% ( 3 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 4 ( 4 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 3 ( 2 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 4 ( 0 ^; 4 !; 0 ?; 4 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
cQ: $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
cP: $o ).
thf(cEXT_O_LEIB,conjecture,
( ! [X1: $o > $o] :
( ( X1 @ cP )
=> ( X1 @ cQ ) )
=> ( cP
<=> cQ ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.MXn31tPWkG/E---3.1_335903.p',cEXT_O_LEIB) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X1: $o > $o] :
( ( X1 @ cP )
=> ( X1 @ cQ ) )
=> ( cP
<=> cQ ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cEXT_O_LEIB]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $o > $o] :
( ( ~ ( X3 @ cP )
| ( X3 @ cQ ) )
& ( ~ cP
| ~ cQ )
& ( cP
| cQ ) ),
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: $o > $o] :
( ( X1 @ cQ )
| ~ ( X1 @ cP ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( cQ
<=> cP ),
inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]),c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( cP
| cQ ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ cP
| ~ cQ ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
cP,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]),c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ cQ,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7])]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]),c_0_7])]),c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYO371^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.21 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.21 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.21 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.21 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.21 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.21 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.21 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.07/0.21 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 16:49:31 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.21 % CPUTime :
% 0.07/0.21 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.28 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.30 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.MXn31tPWkG/E---3.1_335903.p
% 0.25/0.32 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.25/0.32 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSLSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.25/0.32 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ehoh_best_sine_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % ho_unfolding_3 with pid 335916 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Result found by ho_unfolding_3
% 0.25/0.32 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSLSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.25/0.32 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.25/0.32 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.25/0.32 % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SSSFFSBN
% 0.25/0.32 % partial match(1): HGHNF-FFSF00-SSSFFMBN
% 0.25/0.32 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ehoh_best6_lambda with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting sh2lt with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting sh2l with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % ho_unfolding_3 with pid 335922 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Result found by ho_unfolding_3
% 0.25/0.32 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSLSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.25/0.32 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.25/0.32 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.25/0.32 % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SSSFFSBN
% 0.25/0.32 % partial match(1): HGHNF-FFSF00-SSSFFMBN
% 0.25/0.32 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.32 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.25/0.32 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.25/0.32
% 0.25/0.32 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.32 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/0.32 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.32 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.25/0.32 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.25/0.32 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.25/0.32 % Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.25/0.32 % Processed clauses : 10
% 0.25/0.32 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % ...remaining for further processing : 9
% 0.25/0.32 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.25/0.32 % Generated clauses : 5
% 0.25/0.32 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.25/0.32 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % Paramodulations : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.25/0.32 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.32 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.32 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.32 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.32 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.32 % Current number of processed clauses : 2
% 0.25/0.32 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.25/0.32 % ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.25/0.32 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.25/0.32 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5
% 0.25/0.32 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.25/0.32 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.25/0.32 % Condensation attempts : 10
% 0.25/0.32 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.32 % Termbank termtop insertions : 369
% 0.25/0.32 % Search garbage collected termcells : 58
% 0.25/0.32
% 0.25/0.32 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.32 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.32 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.25/0.32 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.25/0.32 % Maximum resident set size: 3880 pages
% 0.25/0.32
% 0.25/0.32 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.32 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.32 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.25/0.32 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.25/0.32 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.32 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------