0.00/0.10	% Problem    : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0.
0.00/0.10	% Command    : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 240 THM
0.09/0.30	% Computer : n002.cluster.edu
0.09/0.30	% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
0.09/0.30	% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
0.09/0.30	% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
0.09/0.30	% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
0.09/0.30	% CPULimit   : 1920
0.09/0.30	% WCLimit    : 240
0.09/0.30	% DateTime   : Wed Jul 30 03:14:04 EDT 2025
0.09/0.30	% CPUTime    : 
0.15/0.42	Running higher-order theorem proving
0.15/0.43	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.WRg4aGhcct/E---3.1_15390.p
1.75/0.65	# Version: 3.0.0-ho
1.75/0.65	# Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
1.75/0.65	# Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 240 seconds (1920 total)
1.75/0.65	# Starting post_as_ho12 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting new_bool_9 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting post_as_ho1 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting post_as_ho4 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting post_as_ho2 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting full_lambda_10 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting new_ho_8 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# new_bool_9 with pid 15471 completed with status 0
1.75/0.65	# Result found by new_bool_9
1.75/0.65	# Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
1.75/0.65	# Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 240 seconds (1920 total)
1.75/0.65	# Starting post_as_ho12 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting new_bool_9 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
1.75/0.65	# Search class: HGHSF-FFSS11-SSSFFMBN
1.75/0.65	# partial match(1): HGHSF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
1.75/0.65	# Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 240 seconds (240 total)
1.75/0.65	# Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 130s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# ho_unfolding_6 with pid 15478 completed with status 10
1.75/0.65	# Starting new_bool_9 with 25s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# new_bool_9 with pid 15490 completed with status 0
1.75/0.65	# Result found by new_bool_9
1.75/0.65	# Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
1.75/0.65	# Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 240 seconds (1920 total)
1.75/0.65	# Starting post_as_ho12 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Starting new_bool_9 with 240s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
1.75/0.65	# Search class: HGHSF-FFSS11-SSSFFMBN
1.75/0.65	# partial match(1): HGHSF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
1.75/0.65	# Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 240 seconds (240 total)
1.75/0.65	# Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 130s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# ho_unfolding_6 with pid 15478 completed with status 10
1.75/0.65	# Starting new_bool_9 with 25s (1) cores
1.75/0.65	# Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
1.75/0.65	# Presaturation interreduction done
1.75/0.65	
1.75/0.65	# Proof found!
1.75/0.65	# SZS status Theorem
1.75/0.65	# SZS output start CNFRefutation
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_23, type, cJ: $i).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_24, type, cLIKE: $i > $i > $o).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_25, type, cWRH: $i > $o).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_26, type, cW: $i > $o).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_27, type, cUNIQUE: $i > $o).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_28, type, cS: $i).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_29, type, cP: $i).
1.75/0.65	thf(decl_30, type, esk1_1: ($i > $o) > $i).
1.75/0.65	thf(cLING1, conjecture, (?[X1:$i > $o]:((((X1 @ cJ)<=>?[X2:$i]:(((((cUNIQUE @ X2)&(cW @ X2))&(cWRH @ X2))&(cLIKE @ cJ @ X2))))&((X1 @ cP)<=>(cLIKE @ cP @ cS))))<=(((![X2:$i]:((![X3:$i]:((((X2)=(X3))<=((cW @ X3)&(cWRH @ X3))))<=(cUNIQUE @ X2)))&(cUNIQUE @ cS))&(cW @ cS))&(cWRH @ cS))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.WRg4aGhcct/E---3.1_15390.p', cLING1)).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(((((![X2:$i]:(((cUNIQUE @ X2)=>![X3:$i]:((((cW @ X3)&(cWRH @ X3))=>((X2)=(X3))))))&(cUNIQUE @ cS))&(cW @ cS))&(cWRH @ cS))=>?[X1:$i > $o]:((((X1 @ cJ)<=>?[X2:$i]:(((((cUNIQUE @ X2)&(cW @ X2))&(cWRH @ X2))&(cLIKE @ cJ @ X2))))&((X1 @ cP)<=>(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cLING1])])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X8:$i, X9:$i, X10:$i > $o, X11:$i]:((((((~(cUNIQUE @ X8)|(~(cW @ X9)|~(cWRH @ X9)|((X8)=(X9))))&(cUNIQUE @ cS))&(cW @ cS))&(cWRH @ cS))&(((~(X10 @ cP)|~(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(~(X10 @ cJ)|(~(cUNIQUE @ X11)|~(cW @ X11)|~(cWRH @ X11)|~(cLIKE @ cJ @ X11))))&((X10 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(~(X10 @ cJ)|(~(cUNIQUE @ X11)|~(cW @ X11)|~(cWRH @ X11)|~(cLIKE @ cJ @ X11)))))&(((((~(X10 @ cP)|~(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cUNIQUE @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))&((X10 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cUNIQUE @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ))))&((~(X10 @ cP)|~(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cW @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))&((X10 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cW @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))))&((~(X10 @ cP)|~(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))&((X10 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))))&((~(X10 @ cP)|~(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))&((X10 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|((cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ X10))|(X10 @ cJ)))))))), 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])])])])])])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o, X2:$i]:((~((X1 @ cP))|~((cLIKE @ cP @ cS))|~((X1 @ cJ))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cLIKE @ cJ @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o, X2:$i]:(((X1 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|~((X1 @ cJ))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cLIKE @ cJ @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i]:((~((cLIKE @ cP @ cS))|~((cLIKE @ cJ @ X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2)))), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i, X1:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ cP)|~((cLIKE @ cJ @ X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2))|~((X1 @ cJ)))), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_4, c_0_5])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(cUNIQUE @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(cW @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ cP)|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i]:((((cJ)=(cP))|~((cLIKE @ cJ @ X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2)))), inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]), c_0_6])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, ((cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 4 */:$i]:(~($true)))))|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ((cUNIQUE @ (esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 4 */:$i]:(~($true)))))|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, ((cW @ (esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 4 */:$i]:(~($true)))))|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_15, negated_conjecture, ((cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 4 */:$i]:(~($true)))))|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_16, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i, X3:$i]:((((X2)=(X3))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2))|~((cW @ X3))|~((cWRH @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_17, negated_conjecture, (cUNIQUE @ cS), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_18, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((cW @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((X1 @ cP))|~((cLIKE @ cP @ cS)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_19, negated_conjecture, (((cJ)=(cP))|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_12]), c_0_13]), c_0_14]), c_0_15])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_20, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((X1 @ cP))|~((cLIKE @ cP @ cS)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_21, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i]:((((cS)=(X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cW @ X2)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_17])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_22, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:((((cJ)=(cP))|(cW @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((X1 @ cP)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18, c_0_19])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_23, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:(((cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((X1 @ cP))|~((cLIKE @ cP @ cS)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_24, negated_conjecture, (((cJ)=(cP))|(cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 4 */:$i]:(((Z0)!=(cJ))))))|~((cLIKE @ cP @ cS))), inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]), c_0_20])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:((((esk1_1 @ X1)=(cS))|((cJ)=(cP))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ X1)))|~((X1 @ cP)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21, c_0_22])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_26, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:((((cJ)=(cP))|(cWRH @ (esk1_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((X1 @ cP)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23, c_0_19])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_27, negated_conjecture, (((cJ)=(cP))|(cLIKE @ cJ @ (esk1_1 @ (^[Z0/* 4 */:$i]:(((Z0)!=(cJ))))))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24, c_0_19])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_28, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:((((esk1_1 @ X1)=(cS))|((cJ)=(cP))|(X1 @ cJ)|~((X1 @ cP)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25, c_0_26])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_29, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i > $o]:((((esk1_1 @ X1)=(cS))|(cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(X1 @ cP)|(X1 @ cJ))), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21, c_0_9]), c_0_10])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_30, negated_conjecture, (((cJ)=(cP))|(cLIKE @ cJ @ cS)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27, c_0_28])])])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_31, negated_conjecture, (cWRH @ cS), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_32, negated_conjecture, (cW @ cS), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_33, negated_conjecture, ((cLIKE @ cP @ cS)|(cLIKE @ cJ @ cS)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12, c_0_29])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_34, negated_conjecture, ((cJ)=(cP)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_30]), c_0_31]), c_0_32]), c_0_17])])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_35, negated_conjecture, (cLIKE @ cP @ cS), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_33, c_0_34])])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_36, negated_conjecture, ![X2:$i]:((~((cLIKE @ cP @ X2))|~((cWRH @ X2))|~((cW @ X2))|~((cUNIQUE @ X2)))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5, c_0_34]), c_0_35])])).
1.75/0.65	thf(c_0_37, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_36, c_0_35]), c_0_31]), c_0_32]), c_0_17])]), ['proof']).
1.75/0.65	# SZS output end CNFRefutation
1.75/0.65	# Parsed axioms                        : 8
1.75/0.65	# Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 7
1.75/0.65	# Initial clauses                      : 14
1.75/0.65	# Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
1.75/0.65	# Initial clauses in saturation        : 14
1.75/0.65	# Processed clauses                    : 143
1.75/0.65	# ...of these trivial                  : 0
1.75/0.65	# ...subsumed                          : 44
1.75/0.65	# ...remaining for further processing  : 99
1.75/0.65	# Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 8
1.75/0.65	# Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
1.75/0.65	# Backward-subsumed                    : 17
1.75/0.65	# Backward-rewritten                   : 56
1.75/0.65	# Generated clauses                    : 654
1.75/0.65	# ...of the previous two non-redundant : 392
1.75/0.65	# ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
1.75/0.65	# Contextual simplify-reflections      : 14
1.75/0.65	# Paramodulations                      : 567
1.75/0.65	# Factorizations                       : 0
1.75/0.65	# NegExts                              : 0
1.75/0.65	# Equation resolutions                 : 9
1.75/0.65	# Disequality decompositions           : 0
1.75/0.65	# Total rewrite steps                  : 230
1.75/0.65	# ...of those cached                   : 225
1.75/0.65	# Propositional unsat checks           : 0
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional check models        : 0
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional clauses             : 0
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
1.75/0.65	#    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
1.75/0.65	#    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
1.75/0.65	#    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
1.75/0.65	#    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
1.75/0.65	# Current number of processed clauses  : 8
1.75/0.65	#    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 5
1.75/0.65	#    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
1.75/0.65	#    Negative unit clauses             : 0
1.75/0.65	#    Non-unit-clauses                  : 3
1.75/0.65	# Current number of unprocessed clauses: 265
1.75/0.65	# ...number of literals in the above   : 1445
1.75/0.65	# Current number of archived formulas  : 0
1.75/0.65	# Current number of archived clauses   : 91
1.75/0.65	# Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 337
1.75/0.65	# Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 133
1.75/0.65	# Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 75
1.75/0.65	# Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
1.75/0.65	# Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
1.75/0.65	# BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
1.75/0.65	# BW rewrite match successes           : 2
1.75/0.65	# Condensation attempts                : 0
1.75/0.65	# Condensation successes               : 0
1.75/0.65	# Termbank termtop insertions          : 39132
1.75/0.65	# Search garbage collected termcells   : 301
1.75/0.65	
1.75/0.65	# -------------------------------------------------
1.75/0.65	# User time                : 0.205 s
1.75/0.65	# System time              : 0.003 s
1.75/0.65	# Total time               : 0.208 s
1.75/0.65	# Maximum resident set size: 1900 pages
1.75/0.65	
1.75/0.65	# -------------------------------------------------
1.75/0.65	# User time                : 0.207 s
1.75/0.65	# System time              : 0.005 s
1.75/0.65	# Total time               : 0.212 s
1.75/0.65	# Maximum resident set size: 1716 pages
1.75/0.65	% E exiting
1.75/0.65	% E exiting
1.75/0.65	EOF