%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Satallax---3.5
% Problem  : SYO209^5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : satallax -E eprover-ho -P picomus -M modes -p tstp -t %d %s

% Computer : n021.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  : 600s
% DateTime : Thu Jul 21 19:30:53 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 66.89s 67.11s
% Output   : Proof 66.89s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem  : SYO209^5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.11/0.12  % Command  : satallax -E eprover-ho -P picomus -M modes -p tstp -t %d %s
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.12/0.33  % DateTime : Sat Jul  9 08:08:51 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 66.89/67.11  % SZS status Theorem
% 66.89/67.11  % Mode: mode482
% 66.89/67.11  % Inferences: 148
% 66.89/67.11  % SZS output start Proof
% 66.89/67.11  thf(ty_a, type, a : $tType).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(ty_eigen__0, type, eigen__0 : (a>a>$o)).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(ty_eigen__3, type, eigen__3 : a).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(h0, assumption, (![X1:a>$o]:(![X2:a]:((X1 @ X2) => (X1 @ (eps__0 @ X1))))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(eigendef_eigen__3, definition, eigen__3 = (eps__0 @ (^[X1:a]:(~((~(((eigen__0 @ X1) = (^[X2:a]:(~(((eigen__0 @ X2) @ X2))))))))))), introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[eigen__3])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(h1, assumption, (![X1:(a>a>$o)>$o]:(![X2:a>a>$o]:((X1 @ X2) => (X1 @ (eps__1 @ X1))))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(eigendef_eigen__0, definition, eigen__0 = (eps__1 @ (^[X1:a>a>$o]:(~((~((![X2:a>$o]:(~((![X3:a]:(~(((X1 @ X3) = X2))))))))))))), introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[eigen__0])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP1,plain,sP1 <=> (![X1:a>$o]:(~((![X2:a]:(~(((eigen__0 @ X2) = X1))))))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP1])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP2,plain,sP2 <=> (![X1:a]:(((eigen__0 @ eigen__3) @ X1) = (~(((eigen__0 @ X1) @ X1))))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP2])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP3,plain,sP3 <=> ((eigen__0 @ eigen__3) = (^[X1:a]:(~(((eigen__0 @ X1) @ X1))))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP3])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP4,plain,sP4 <=> ((eigen__0 @ eigen__3) @ eigen__3),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP4])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP5,plain,sP5 <=> (sP4 = (~(sP4))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP5])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP6,plain,sP6 <=> (![X1:a]:(~(((eigen__0 @ X1) = (^[X2:a]:(~(((eigen__0 @ X2) @ X2)))))))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP6])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(sP7,plain,sP7 <=> (![X1:a>a>$o]:(~((![X2:a>$o]:(~((![X3:a]:(~(((X1 @ X3) = X2)))))))))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP7])])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(cCT29,conjecture,(![X1:a>a>$o]:(~((![X2:a>$o]:(~((![X3:a]:(~((![X4:(a>$o)>$o]:((X4 @ (X1 @ X3)) => (X4 @ X2))))))))))))).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(h2,negated_conjecture,(~((![X1:a>a>$o]:(~((![X2:a>$o]:(~((![X3:a]:(~((![X4:(a>$o)>$o]:((X4 @ (X1 @ X3)) => (X4 @ X2)))))))))))))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cCT29])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(1,plain,((~(sP5) | ~(sP4)) | ~(sP4)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(2,plain,((~(sP5) | sP4) | sP4),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(3,plain,(~(sP2) | sP5),inference(all_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(4,plain,(~(sP3) | sP2),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(5,plain,(sP6 | sP3),inference(eigen_choice_rule,[status(thm),assumptions([h0])],[h0,eigendef_eigen__3])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(6,plain,(~(sP1) | ~(sP6)),inference(all_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(7,plain,(sP7 | sP1),inference(eigen_choice_rule,[status(thm),assumptions([h1])],[h1,eigendef_eigen__0])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(8,plain,(~(sP7)),inference(normalize,[status(thm)],[h2]).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(9,plain,$false,inference(prop_unsat,[status(thm),assumptions([h2,h1,h0])],[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(10,plain,$false,inference(eigenvar_choice,[status(thm),assumptions([h2,h0]),eigenvar_choice(discharge,[h1])],[9,h1])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(11,plain,$false,inference(eigenvar_choice,[status(thm),assumptions([h2]),eigenvar_choice(discharge,[h0])],[10,h0])).
% 66.89/67.11  thf(0,theorem,(![X1:a>a>$o]:(~((![X2:a>$o]:(~((![X3:a]:(~((![X4:(a>$o)>$o]:((X4 @ (X1 @ X3)) => (X4 @ X2)))))))))))),inference(contra,[status(thm),contra(discharge,[h2])],[9,h2])).
% 66.89/67.11  % SZS output end Proof
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------