0.05/0.13 % Problem : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0. 0.05/0.13 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 240 THM 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 1920 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 240 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Wed Jul 30 02:10:04 EDT 2025 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : 0.20/0.49 Running higher-order theorem proving 0.20/0.50 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=240 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.oEWMjTMia8/E---3.1_8748.p 0.20/0.52 # Version: 3.0.0-ho 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA. 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 240 seconds (1920 total) 0.20/0.52 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_9 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting post_as_ho1 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting post_as_ho4 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting post_as_ho2 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting full_lambda_10 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_ho_8 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # post_as_ho12 with pid 8826 completed with status 0 0.20/0.52 # Result found by post_as_ho12 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA. 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 240 seconds (1920 total) 0.20/0.52 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # No SInE strategy applied 0.20/0.52 # Search class: HGUSF-FFSF21-SSSFFMBC 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 240 seconds (240 total) 0.20/0.52 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 60s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # ho_unfolding_6 with pid 8834 completed with status 0 0.20/0.52 # Result found by ho_unfolding_6 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA. 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 240 seconds (1920 total) 0.20/0.52 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 240s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # No SInE strategy applied 0.20/0.52 # Search class: HGUSF-FFSF21-SSSFFMBC 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 240 seconds (240 total) 0.20/0.52 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 60s (1) cores 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s 0.20/0.52 0.20/0.52 # Proof found! 0.20/0.52 # SZS status Theorem 0.20/0.52 # SZS output start CNFRefutation 0.20/0.52 thf(decl_sort1, type, a: $tType). 0.20/0.52 thf(decl_23, type, cR: a > a > $o). 0.20/0.52 thf(decl_24, type, esk1_1: (a > $o) > a). 0.20/0.52 thf(decl_25, type, esk2_2: (a > $o) > a > a). 0.20/0.52 thf(decl_26, type, esk3_0: a). 0.20/0.52 thf(cTHM542_pme, conjecture, (![X1:a > $o]:((?[X2:a]:((X1 @ X2))=>?[X2:a]:((((X1 @ X2)&![X3:a]:(((X1 @ X3)=>(cR @ X2 @ X3))))&![X4:a]:((((X4)=(X2))<=(![X3:a]:(((cR @ X4 @ X3)<=(X1 @ X3)))&(X1 @ X4))))))))=>![X3:a]:((cR @ X3 @ X3))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.oEWMjTMia8/E---3.1_8748.p', cTHM542_pme)). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~((![X1:a > $o]:((?[X2:a]:((X1 @ X2))=>?[X2:a]:((((X1 @ X2)&![X3:a]:(((X1 @ X3)=>(cR @ X2 @ X3))))&![X4:a]:(((![X3:a]:(((X1 @ X3)=>(cR @ X4 @ X3)))&(X1 @ X4))=>((X4)=(X2))))))))=>![X3:a]:((cR @ X3 @ X3)))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM542_pme])])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X12:a > $o, X13:a, X15:a, X16:a]:((((((X12 @ (esk1_1 @ X12))|~(X12 @ X13))&(~(X12 @ X15)|(cR @ (esk1_1 @ X12) @ X15)|~(X12 @ X13)))&(((X12 @ (esk2_2 @ X12 @ X16))|~(X12 @ X16)|((X16)=(esk1_1 @ X12))|~(X12 @ X13))&(~(cR @ X16 @ (esk2_2 @ X12 @ X16))|~(X12 @ X16)|((X16)=(esk1_1 @ X12))|~(X12 @ X13))))&~(cR @ esk3_0 @ esk3_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])])])])])])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a]:(((X1 @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|~((X1 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a, X3:a]:(((cR @ (esk1_1 @ X1) @ X2)|~((X1 @ X2))|~((X1 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a]:(((esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 3 */:a]:(((Z0)=(X2)))))=(X2))), inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]), c_0_3])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ~((cR @ esk3_0 @ esk3_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a]:((cR @ X2 @ X2)), inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4, c_0_5])])])])). 0.20/0.52 thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6, c_0_7])]), ['proof']). 0.20/0.52 # SZS output end CNFRefutation 0.20/0.52 # Parsed axioms : 3 0.20/0.52 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0 0.20/0.52 # Initial clauses : 7 0.20/0.52 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 2 0.20/0.52 # Initial clauses in saturation : 5 0.20/0.52 # Processed clauses : 8 0.20/0.52 # ...of these trivial : 0 0.20/0.52 # ...subsumed : 1 0.20/0.52 # ...remaining for further processing : 7 0.20/0.52 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4 0.20/0.52 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0 0.20/0.52 # Backward-subsumed : 0 0.20/0.52 # Backward-rewritten : 1 0.20/0.52 # Generated clauses : 20 0.20/0.52 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11 0.20/0.52 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0 0.20/0.52 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0 0.20/0.52 # Paramodulations : 13 0.20/0.52 # Factorizations : 0 0.20/0.52 # NegExts : 0 0.20/0.52 # Equation resolutions : 4 0.20/0.52 # Disequality decompositions : 0 0.20/0.52 # Total rewrite steps : 1 0.20/0.52 # ...of those cached : 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional unsat checks : 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional check models : 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional clauses : 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional unsat core size : 0 0.20/0.52 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000 0.20/0.52 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000 0.20/0.52 # Propositional solver time : 0.000 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000 0.20/0.52 # Current number of processed clauses : 6 0.20/0.52 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1 0.20/0.52 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1 0.20/0.52 # Negative unit clauses : 0 0.20/0.52 # Non-unit-clauses : 4 0.20/0.52 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 8 0.20/0.52 # ...number of literals in the above : 24 0.20/0.52 # Current number of archived formulas : 0 0.20/0.52 # Current number of archived clauses : 1 0.20/0.52 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11 0.20/0.52 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8 0.20/0.52 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0 0.20/0.52 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1 0.20/0.52 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0 0.20/0.52 # BW rewrite match attempts : 14 0.20/0.52 # BW rewrite match successes : 4 0.20/0.52 # Condensation attempts : 8 0.20/0.52 # Condensation successes : 0 0.20/0.52 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1185 0.20/0.52 # Search garbage collected termcells : 247 0.20/0.52 0.20/0.52 # ------------------------------------------------- 0.20/0.52 # User time : 0.003 s 0.20/0.52 # System time : 0.003 s 0.20/0.52 # Total time : 0.006 s 0.20/0.52 # Maximum resident set size: 1716 pages 0.20/0.52 0.20/0.52 # ------------------------------------------------- 0.20/0.52 # User time : 0.005 s 0.20/0.52 # System time : 0.005 s 0.20/0.52 # Total time : 0.010 s 0.20/0.52 # Maximum resident set size: 1720 pages 0.20/0.52 % E exiting 0.20/0.52 % E exiting 0.20/0.52 EOF