%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO372^5 : 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 : n018.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 08:42:51 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 0.26s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 5 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 32 ( 5 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 45 ( 10 ~; 4 |; 2 &; 24 @)
% ( 2 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 1 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 6 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 5 ( 0 ^; 5 !; 0 ?; 5 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
gtype: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
g: b > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
h: ( b > $o ) > gtype ).
thf(decl_25,type,
f: b > $o ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk1_0: b ).
thf(cEXT_SET2,conjecture,
( ! [X1: b] :
( ( f @ X1 )
<=> ( g @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( h @ f )
= ( h @ g ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.twtT2Wn9pd/E---3.1_335054.p',cEXT_SET2) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X1: b] :
( ( f @ X1 )
<=> ( g @ X1 ) )
=> ( ( h @ f )
= ( h @ g ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cEXT_SET2]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: b] :
( ( ~ ( f @ X3 )
| ( g @ X3 ) )
& ( ~ ( g @ X3 )
| ( f @ X3 ) )
& ( ( h @ f )
!= ( h @ g ) ) ),
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,
( ( h @ f )
!= ( h @ g ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
g != f,
inference(ext_eqres,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ( g @ esk1_0 )
<~> ( f @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: b] :
( ( f @ X1 )
| ~ ( g @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ( g @ esk1_0 ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: b] :
( ( g @ X1 )
| ~ ( f @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ( f @ esk1_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]),c_0_7]),c_0_9]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SYO372^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.19 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.19 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.19 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.19 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.19 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.19 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.19 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.07/0.19 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 16:51:41 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.19 % CPUTime :
% 0.07/0.19 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.23 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.07/0.24 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.twtT2Wn9pd/E---3.1_335054.p
% 0.23/0.26 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.23/0.26 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSN.
% 0.23/0.26 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_nonlambdatoforall with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % post_as_ho10 with pid 335077 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Result found by post_as_ho10
% 0.23/0.26 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSN.
% 0.23/0.26 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_nonlambdatoforall with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.26 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.26 % Search class: HHUSF-FFSF11-SSSFFFNN
% 0.23/0.26 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % SubtermCWHack with pid 335082 completed with status 10
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % post_as_ho10 with pid 335089 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Result found by post_as_ho10
% 0.23/0.26 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSN.
% 0.23/0.26 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_nonlambdatoforall with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.26 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.26 % Search class: HHUSF-FFSF11-SSSFFFNN
% 0.23/0.26 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % SubtermCWHack with pid 335082 completed with status 10
% 0.23/0.26 % Starting post_as_ho10 with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.26 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.26 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.23/0.26
% 0.23/0.26 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.26 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.26 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.26 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.23/0.26 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.23/0.26 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.23/0.26 % Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.23/0.26 % Processed clauses : 11
% 0.23/0.26 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.23/0.26 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.23/0.26 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.23/0.26 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.23/0.26 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.23/0.26 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % NegExts : 1
% 0.23/0.26 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.26 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.26 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.26 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.26 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.26 % Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.23/0.26 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.26 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.23/0.26 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.26 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.23/0.26 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.23/0.26 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/0.26 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.23/0.26 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.23/0.26 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.26 % Termbank termtop insertions : 395
% 0.23/0.26 % Search garbage collected termcells : 60
% 0.23/0.26
% 0.23/0.26 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.26 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.26 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.26 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.23/0.26 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.23/0.26
% 0.23/0.26 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.26 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.26 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.23/0.26 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.23/0.26 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.23/0.26 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------