TSTP Solution File: SEV221^5 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : SEV221^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Tue May 21 04:08:01 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.15s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09  % Problem    : SEV221^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.10  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.30  % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.30  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.30  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.30  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.30  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.30  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.10/0.30  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.10/0.30  % DateTime   : Sun May 19 18:56:23 EDT 2024
% 0.10/0.30  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.15/0.41  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41  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/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/0.42  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # new_bool_9 with pid 13535 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Result found by new_bool_9
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.42  # Search class: HGHSF-FFSM00-MSSFFSBN
% 0.15/0.42  # partial match(2): HGHSF-FFSF00-SSSFFSBN
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # ho_unfolding_3 with pid 13542 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Result found by ho_unfolding_3
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.42  # Search class: HGHSF-FFSM00-MSSFFSBN
% 0.15/0.42  # partial match(2): HGHSF-FFSF00-SSSFFSBN
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # Proof found!
% 0.15/0.42  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.42  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_sort1, type, a: $tType).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_22, type, cZ: a > $o).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_23, type, cW: (a > $o) > $o).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_24, type, esk1_0: a).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_25, type, epred1_0: a > $o).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_26, type, epred2_0: a > $o).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(decl_27, type, epred3_0: a > $o).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(cTHM61_pme, conjecture, ![X1:a]:(((?[X2:a > $o]:(((cW @ X2)&(X2 @ X1)))&(cZ @ X1))<=>?[X2:a > $o]:((?[X3:a > $o]:(((cW @ X3)&((X2)=(^[X4:a]:(((cZ @ X4)&(X3 @ X4)))))))&(X2 @ X1))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', cTHM61_pme)).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1:a]:(((?[X2:a > $o]:(((cW @ X2)&(X2 @ X1)))&(cZ @ X1))<=>?[X2:a > $o]:((?[X3:a > $o]:(((cW @ X3)&((X2)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&X3 @ Z0))))))&(X2 @ X1)))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM61_pme])])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X10:a > $o, X11:a > $o, X12:a > $o]:(((~(cW @ X10)|~(X10 @ esk1_0)|~(cZ @ esk1_0)|(~(cW @ X12)|((X11)!=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&X12 @ Z0))))|~(X11 @ esk1_0)))&((((((cW @ epred3_0)|(cW @ epred1_0))&(((epred2_0)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&epred3_0 @ Z0))))|(cW @ epred1_0)))&((epred2_0 @ esk1_0)|(cW @ epred1_0)))&((((cW @ epred3_0)|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0))&(((epred2_0)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&epred3_0 @ Z0))))|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0)))&((epred2_0 @ esk1_0)|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0))))&((((cW @ epred3_0)|(cZ @ esk1_0))&(((epred2_0)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&epred3_0 @ Z0))))|(cZ @ esk1_0)))&((epred2_0 @ esk1_0)|(cZ @ esk1_0)))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, (((epred2_0)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&(epred3_0 @ Z0)))))|(cZ @ esk1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a > $o, X3:a > $o, X6:a > $o]:((~((cW @ X2))|~((X2 @ esk1_0))|~((cZ @ esk1_0))|~((cW @ X3))|((X6)!=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&(X3 @ Z0)))))|~((X6 @ esk1_0)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ![X18:a]:(((((cZ @ X18)&(epred3_0 @ X18))<=>(epred2_0 @ X18))|(cZ @ esk1_0))), inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a > $o, X3:a > $o]:((~(((cZ @ esk1_0)&(X2 @ esk1_0)))|~((cZ @ esk1_0))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cW @ X3))|~((X3 @ esk1_0)))), inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a]:(((cZ @ esk1_0)|(cZ @ X1)|~((epred2_0 @ X1)))), inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, ((epred2_0 @ esk1_0)|(cZ @ esk1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, (((epred2_0)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&(epred3_0 @ Z0)))))|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a > $o]:((~((cZ @ esk1_0))|~((X2 @ esk1_0))|~((cW @ X2)))), inference(condense,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, (cZ @ esk1_0), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7, c_0_8])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, (((epred2_0)=(^[Z0/* 8 */:a]:(((cZ @ Z0)&(epred3_0 @ Z0)))))|(cW @ epred1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ![X20:a]:(((((cZ @ X20)&(epred3_0 @ X20))<=>(epred2_0 @ X20))|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0))), inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a > $o]:((~((X2 @ esk1_0))|~((cW @ X2)))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10, c_0_11])])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_15, negated_conjecture, ((epred2_0 @ esk1_0)|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_16, negated_conjecture, ((epred2_0 @ esk1_0)|(cW @ epred1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_17, negated_conjecture, ![X19:a]:(((((cZ @ X19)&(epred3_0 @ X19))<=>(epred2_0 @ X19))|(cW @ epred1_0))), inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_12])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_18, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a]:(((epred1_0 @ esk1_0)|(epred3_0 @ X1)|~((epred2_0 @ X1)))), inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_13])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_19, negated_conjecture, (epred2_0 @ esk1_0), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14, c_0_15]), c_0_16])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_20, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a]:(((cW @ epred1_0)|(epred3_0 @ X1)|~((epred2_0 @ X1)))), inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_17])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_21, negated_conjecture, ((epred3_0 @ esk1_0)|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18, c_0_19])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_22, negated_conjecture, ((epred3_0 @ esk1_0)|(cW @ epred1_0)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20, c_0_19])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_23, negated_conjecture, ((cW @ epred3_0)|(epred1_0 @ esk1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_24, negated_conjecture, ((cW @ epred3_0)|(cW @ epred1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, (epred3_0 @ esk1_0), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14, c_0_21]), c_0_22])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_26, negated_conjecture, (cW @ epred3_0), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14, c_0_23]), c_0_24])).
% 0.15/0.42  thf(c_0_27, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14, c_0_25]), c_0_26])]), ['proof']).
% 0.15/0.42  # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.15/0.42  # Parsed axioms                        : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 3
% 0.15/0.42  # Initial clauses                      : 10
% 0.15/0.42  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 10
% 0.15/0.42  # Processed clauses                    : 43
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...remaining for further processing  : 43
% 0.15/0.42  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1
% 0.15/0.42  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Backward-rewritten                   : 15
% 0.15/0.42  # Generated clauses                    : 30
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 28
% 0.15/0.42  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 0.15/0.42  # Paramodulations                      : 12
% 0.15/0.42  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # NegExts                              : 1
% 0.15/0.42  # Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 0.15/0.42  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Total rewrite steps                  : 17
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of those cached                   : 13
% 0.15/0.42  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of processed clauses  : 12
% 0.15/0.42  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 4
% 0.15/0.42  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.15/0.42  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 6
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.15/0.42  # ...number of literals in the above   : 15
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of archived clauses   : 30
% 0.15/0.42  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 21
% 0.15/0.42  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14
% 0.15/0.42  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.15/0.42  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # BW rewrite match successes           : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # Condensation attempts                : 43
% 0.15/0.42  # Condensation successes               : 1
% 0.15/0.42  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 1958
% 0.15/0.42  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 212
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42  # User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.42  # System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Maximum resident set size: 1780 pages
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42  # User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.15/0.42  # System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Maximum resident set size: 1716 pages
% 0.15/0.42  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.15/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------