0.06/0.12	% Problem    : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0.
0.06/0.13	% Command    : eprover-ho %s --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --free-numbers -auto-schedule -p --cpu-limit=%d --neg-ext=all --pos-ext=all --ext-sup-max-depth=2 --schedule-kind=CASC
0.12/0.33	% Computer   : n003.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   : 1200
0.12/0.33	% WCLimit    : 120
0.12/0.33	% DateTime   : Tue Jul 13 11:30:09 EDT 2021
0.12/0.33	% CPUTime    : 
0.12/0.33	% Number of cores: 8
0.12/0.33	% Python version: Python 3.6.8
0.12/0.33	# Version: 2.6rc1-ho
0.12/0.33	# No SInE strategy applied
0.12/0.33	# Trying AutoSched0 for 59 seconds
0.18/0.36	# AutoSched0-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y_ni
0.18/0.36	# and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
0.18/0.36	#
0.18/0.36	# Preprocessing time       : 0.027 s
0.18/0.36	# Presaturation interreduction done
0.18/0.36	
0.18/0.36	# Proof found!
0.18/0.36	# SZS status Theorem
0.18/0.36	# SZS output start CNFRefutation
0.18/0.36	thf(cTHM304, conjecture, ((((![X1:$i]:cEQ @ X1 @ X1&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cP @ X1&cEQ @ X1 @ X2)=>cP @ X2))&cP @ a)&![X2:$i, X3:$i]:(cEQ @ X2 @ X3<=cEQ @ (f @ X2) @ (f @ X3)))=>?[X4:$i > $o]:(?[X3:$i]:X4 @ X3&![X1:$i]:(X4 @ (f @ X1)=>cP @ X1))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', cTHM304)).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(((((![X1:$i]:cEQ @ X1 @ X1&![X1:$i, X2:$i]:((cP @ X1&cEQ @ X1 @ X2)=>cP @ X2))&cP @ a)&![X2:$i, X3:$i]:(cEQ @ (f @ X2) @ (f @ X3)=>cEQ @ X2 @ X3))=>?[X4:$i > $o]:(?[X3:$i]:X4 @ X3&![X1:$i]:(X4 @ (f @ X1)=>cP @ X1)))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM304])])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X13:$i, X14:$i, X15:$i, X16:$i, X17:$i, X18:$i > $o, X19:$i]:((((cEQ @ X13 @ X13&(~cP @ X14|~cEQ @ X14 @ X15|cP @ X15))&cP @ a)&(~cEQ @ (f @ X16) @ (f @ X17)|cEQ @ X16 @ X17))&((X18 @ (f @ (esk1_1 @ X18))|~X18 @ X19)&(~cP @ (esk1_1 @ X18)|~X18 @ X19))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ![X4:$i > $o, X1:$i]:(X4 @ (f @ (esk1_1 @ X4))|~X4 @ X1), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:cEQ @ X1 @ X1, inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(cEQ @ X1 @ X2|~cEQ @ (f @ X1) @ (f @ X2)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:cEQ @ X1 @ (f @ (esk1_1 @ (cEQ @ X1))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3, c_0_4])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(cP @ X2|~cP @ X1|~cEQ @ X1 @ X2), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:cEQ @ X1 @ (esk1_1 @ (cEQ @ (f @ X1))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5, c_0_6])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, ![X4:$i > $o, X1:$i]:(~cP @ (esk1_1 @ X4)|~X4 @ X1), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:(cP @ (esk1_1 @ (cEQ @ (f @ X1)))|~cP @ X1), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7, c_0_8])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i, X1:$i]:(~cEQ @ (f @ X1) @ X2|~cP @ X1), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9, c_0_10])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, cP @ a, inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i]:~cP @ X1, inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_8])).
0.18/0.36	thf(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_12, c_0_13]), ['proof']).
0.18/0.36	# SZS output end CNFRefutation
0.18/0.36	# Proof object total steps             : 15
0.18/0.36	# Proof object clause steps            : 12
0.18/0.36	# Proof object formula steps           : 3
0.18/0.36	# Proof object conjectures             : 15
0.18/0.36	# Proof object clause conjectures      : 12
0.18/0.36	# Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
0.18/0.36	# Proof object initial clauses used    : 6
0.18/0.36	# Proof object initial formulas used   : 1
0.18/0.36	# Proof object generating inferences   : 5
0.18/0.36	# Proof object simplifying inferences  : 1
0.18/0.36	# Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
0.18/0.36	# Parsed axioms                        : 5
0.18/0.36	# Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
0.18/0.36	# Initial clauses                      : 10
0.18/0.36	# Removed in clause preprocessing      : 4
0.18/0.36	# Initial clauses in saturation        : 6
0.18/0.36	# Processed clauses                    : 19
0.18/0.36	# ...of these trivial                  : 0
0.18/0.36	# ...subsumed                          : 0
0.18/0.36	# ...remaining for further processing  : 19
0.18/0.36	# Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
0.18/0.36	# Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
0.18/0.36	# Backward-subsumed                    : 0
0.18/0.36	# Backward-rewritten                   : 0
0.18/0.36	# Generated clauses                    : 22
0.18/0.36	# ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 9
0.18/0.36	# Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
0.18/0.36	# Paramodulations                      : 18
0.18/0.36	# Factorizations                       : 0
0.18/0.36	# NegExts                              : 0
0.18/0.36	# Equation resolutions                 : 0
0.18/0.36	# Propositional unsat checks           : 0
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional check models        : 0
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional clauses             : 0
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
0.18/0.36	#    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
0.18/0.36	#    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
0.18/0.36	#    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
0.18/0.36	#    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
0.18/0.36	# Current number of processed clauses  : 11
0.18/0.36	#    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
0.18/0.36	#    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
0.18/0.36	#    Negative unit clauses             : 1
0.18/0.36	#    Non-unit-clauses                  : 7
0.18/0.36	# Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
0.18/0.36	# ...number of literals in the above   : 2
0.18/0.36	# Current number of archived formulas  : 0
0.18/0.36	# Current number of archived clauses   : 8
0.18/0.36	# Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
0.18/0.36	# Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
0.18/0.36	# Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
0.18/0.36	# Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
0.18/0.36	# Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
0.18/0.36	# BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
0.18/0.36	# BW rewrite match successes           : 0
0.18/0.36	# Condensation attempts                : 0
0.18/0.36	# Condensation successes               : 0
0.18/0.36	# Termbank termtop insertions          : 867
0.18/0.36	
0.18/0.36	# -------------------------------------------------
0.18/0.36	# User time                : 0.025 s
0.18/0.36	# System time              : 0.006 s
0.18/0.36	# Total time               : 0.031 s
0.18/0.36	# Maximum resident set size: 1636 pages
0.18/0.36	EOF