0.00/0.02	% Problem  : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0.
0.00/0.04	% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 180 THM
0.09/0.35	% Computer : n018.cluster.edu
0.09/0.35	% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
0.09/0.35	% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
0.09/0.35	% Memory   : 8046.5625MB
0.09/0.35	% OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
0.09/0.35	% CPULimit : 1440
0.09/0.35	% WCLimit  : 180
0.09/0.35	% DateTime : Mon Jul 27 09:52:08 UTC 2026
0.09/0.35	% CPUTime  : 
0.09/0.35	Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 180 THM
0.12/0.40	Running higher-order theorem proving
0.12/0.41	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=180 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.3J0nID8MHY/E---3.1_1157532.p
0.12/0.45	% Version: 3.5.1-ho
0.12/0.45	% Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
0.12/0.45	% Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho12 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting new_bool_9 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho1 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho4 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho2 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting full_lambda_10 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Starting new_ho_8 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% post_as_ho12 with pid 1157545 completed with status 0
0.12/0.45	% Result found by post_as_ho12
0.12/0.45	% Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
0.12/0.45	% Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho12 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
0.12/0.45	% No SInE strategy applied
0.12/0.45	% Search class: HGUNF-FFSS32-MSSFFSBN
0.12/0.45	% Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 180 seconds (180 total)
0.12/0.45	% Starting SubtermCWHack with 19s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% SubtermCWHack with pid 1157554 completed with status 10
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho12 with 109s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% post_as_ho12 with pid 1157561 completed with status 0
0.12/0.45	% Result found by post_as_ho12
0.12/0.45	% Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
0.12/0.45	% Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho12 with 180s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
0.12/0.45	% No SInE strategy applied
0.12/0.45	% Search class: HGUNF-FFSS32-MSSFFSBN
0.12/0.45	% Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 180 seconds (180 total)
0.12/0.45	% Starting SubtermCWHack with 19s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% SubtermCWHack with pid 1157554 completed with status 10
0.12/0.45	% Starting post_as_ho12 with 109s (1) cores
0.12/0.45	% Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
0.12/0.45	% Presaturation interreduction done
0.12/0.45	
0.12/0.45	% Proof found!
0.12/0.45	% SZS status Theorem
0.12/0.45	% SZS output start CNFRefutation
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_23, type, cHALF: $i > $i > $o).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_24, type, cDOUBLE: $i > $i > $o).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_25, type, cS: $i > $i).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_26, type, c0: $i).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_27, type, esk1_3: ($i > $i > $o) > $i > $i > $i).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_28, type, esk2_3: ($i > $i > $o) > $i > $i > $i).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_29, type, esk3_0: $i).
0.12/0.45	thf(decl_30, type, esk4_0: $i).
0.12/0.45	thf(cTHM301, conjecture, (![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cHALF @ X2 @ X1)<=(cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2)))<=(((![X3:$i, X4:$i]:(((cHALF @ X3 @ X4)=>(cHALF @ (cS @ (cS @ X3)) @ (cS @ X4))))&(cHALF @ (cS @ c0) @ c0))&(cHALF @ c0 @ c0))&![X5:$i > $i > $o, X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((X5 @ X1 @ X2)<=((![X3:$i, X4:$i]:(((X5 @ (cS @ X3) @ (cS @ (cS @ X4)))<=(X5 @ X3 @ X4)))&(X5 @ c0 @ c0))&(cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2)))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.3J0nID8MHY/E---3.1_1157532.p', cTHM301)).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~((![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cHALF @ X2 @ X1)<=(cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2)))<=(((![X3:$i, X4:$i]:(((cHALF @ X3 @ X4)=>(cHALF @ (cS @ (cS @ X3)) @ (cS @ X4))))&(cHALF @ (cS @ c0) @ c0))&(cHALF @ c0 @ c0))&![X5:$i > $i > $o, X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((X5 @ X1 @ X2)<=((![X3:$i, X4:$i]:(((X5 @ (cS @ X3) @ (cS @ (cS @ X4)))<=(X5 @ X3 @ X4)))&(X5 @ c0 @ c0))&(cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2))))))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM301])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ~(((((![X3:$i, X4:$i]:(((cHALF @ X3 @ X4)=>(cHALF @ (cS @ (cS @ X3)) @ (cS @ X4))))&(cHALF @ (cS @ c0) @ c0))&(cHALF @ c0 @ c0))&![X5:$i > $i > $o, X1:$i, X2:$i]:((((![X3:$i, X4:$i]:(((X5 @ X3 @ X4)=>(X5 @ (cS @ X3) @ (cS @ (cS @ X4)))))&(X5 @ c0 @ c0))&(cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2))=>(X5 @ X1 @ X2))))=>![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2)=>(cHALF @ X2 @ X1))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ![X15:$i, X16:$i, X17:$i > $i > $o, X18:$i, X19:$i]:((((((~(cHALF @ X15 @ X16)|(cHALF @ (cS @ (cS @ X15)) @ (cS @ X16)))&(cHALF @ (cS @ c0) @ c0))&(cHALF @ c0 @ c0))&(((X17 @ (esk1_3 @ X17 @ X18 @ X19) @ (esk2_3 @ X17 @ X18 @ X19))|~(X17 @ c0 @ c0)|~(cDOUBLE @ X18 @ X19)|(X17 @ X18 @ X19))&(~(X17 @ (cS @ (esk1_3 @ X17 @ X18 @ X19)) @ (cS @ (cS @ (esk2_3 @ X17 @ X18 @ X19))))|~(X17 @ c0 @ c0)|~(cDOUBLE @ X18 @ X19)|(X17 @ X18 @ X19))))&((cDOUBLE @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)&~(cHALF @ esk4_0 @ esk3_0)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])])])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i, X5:$i > $i > $o, X2:$i]:(((X5 @ X1 @ X2)|~((X5 @ (cS @ (esk1_3 @ X5 @ X1 @ X2)) @ (cS @ (cS @ (esk2_3 @ X5 @ X1 @ X2)))))|~((X5 @ c0 @ c0))|~((cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, (cDOUBLE @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i, X5:$i > $i > $o, X2:$i]:(((X5 @ (esk1_3 @ X5 @ X1 @ X2) @ (esk2_3 @ X5 @ X1 @ X2))|(X5 @ X1 @ X2)|~((X5 @ c0 @ c0))|~((cDOUBLE @ X1 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ![X5:$i > $i > $o]:(((X5 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)|~((X5 @ (cS @ (esk1_3 @ X5 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)) @ (cS @ (cS @ (esk2_3 @ X5 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)))))|~((X5 @ c0 @ c0)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4, c_0_5])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, ![X1:$i, X2:$i]:(((cHALF @ (cS @ (cS @ X1)) @ (cS @ X2))|~((cHALF @ X1 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, (cHALF @ c0 @ c0), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, ~((cHALF @ esk4_0 @ esk3_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, ![X5:$i > $i > $o]:(((X5 @ (esk1_3 @ X5 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0) @ (esk2_3 @ X5 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0))|(X5 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)|~((X5 @ c0 @ c0)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6, c_0_5])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, ~((cHALF @ (esk2_3 @ (^[Z0:$i, Z1:$i]:((cHALF @ Z1 @ Z0))) @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0) @ (esk1_3 @ (^[Z0:$i, Z1:$i]:((cHALF @ Z1 @ Z0))) @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0))), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7, c_0_8]), c_0_9])]), c_0_10])).
0.12/0.45	thf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_9]), c_0_12]), c_0_10]), ['proof']).
0.12/0.45	% SZS output end CNFRefutation
0.12/0.45	% Parsed axioms                        : 5
0.12/0.45	% Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
0.12/0.45	% Initial clauses                      : 11
0.12/0.45	% Removed in clause preprocessing      : 4
0.12/0.45	% Initial clauses in saturation        : 7
0.12/0.45	% Processed clauses                    : 18
0.12/0.45	% ...of these trivial                  : 0
0.12/0.45	% ...subsumed                          : 0
0.12/0.45	% ...remaining for further processing  : 18
0.12/0.45	% Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
0.12/0.45	% Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
0.12/0.45	% Backward-subsumed                    : 0
0.12/0.45	% Backward-rewritten                   : 0
0.12/0.45	% Generated clauses                    : 16
0.12/0.45	% ...of the previous two non-redundant : 7
0.12/0.45	% ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
0.12/0.45	% Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
0.12/0.45	% Paramodulations                      : 8
0.12/0.45	% Factorizations                       : 0
0.12/0.45	% NegExts                              : 0
0.12/0.45	% Equation resolutions                 : 2
0.12/0.45	% Disequality decompositions           : 0
0.12/0.45	% Total rewrite steps                  : 2
0.12/0.45	% ...of those cached                   : 1
0.12/0.45	% Propositional unsat checks           : 0
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional check models        : 0
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional clauses             : 0
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
0.12/0.45	%    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
0.12/0.45	%    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
0.12/0.45	%    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
0.12/0.45	%    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
0.12/0.45	% Current number of processed clauses  : 11
0.12/0.45	%    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
0.12/0.45	%    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
0.12/0.45	%    Negative unit clauses             : 2
0.12/0.45	%    Non-unit-clauses                  : 6
0.12/0.45	% Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
0.12/0.45	% ...number of literals in the above   : 8
0.12/0.45	% Current number of archived formulas  : 0
0.12/0.45	% Current number of archived clauses   : 7
0.12/0.45	% Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
0.12/0.45	% Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
0.12/0.45	% Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
0.12/0.45	% Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
0.12/0.45	% Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
0.12/0.45	% BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
0.12/0.45	% BW rewrite match successes           : 0
0.12/0.45	% Condensation attempts                : 0
0.12/0.45	% Condensation successes               : 0
0.12/0.45	% Termbank termtop insertions          : 2623
0.12/0.45	% Search garbage collected termcells   : 293
0.12/0.45	
0.12/0.45	% -------------------------------------------------
0.12/0.45	% User time                : 0.005 s
0.12/0.45	% System time              : 0.005 s
0.12/0.45	% Total time               : 0.010 s
0.12/0.45	% Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
0.12/0.45	
0.12/0.45	% -------------------------------------------------
0.12/0.45	% User time                : 0.006 s
0.12/0.45	% System time              : 0.011 s
0.12/0.45	% Total time               : 0.018 s
0.12/0.45	% Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
0.12/0.45	% E exiting
0.12/0.45	EOF