0.00/0.03	% Problem  : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0.
0.00/0.05	% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 180 THM
0.12/0.38	% Computer : n002.cluster.edu
0.12/0.38	% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
0.12/0.38	% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
0.12/0.38	% Memory   : 8046.5625MB
0.12/0.38	% OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
0.12/0.38	% CPULimit : 1440
0.12/0.38	% WCLimit  : 180
0.12/0.38	% DateTime : Mon Jul 27 09:29:28 UTC 2026
0.12/0.38	% CPUTime  : 
0.12/0.38	Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 180 THM
0.12/0.42	Running higher-order theorem proving
0.12/0.44	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.agnZUQsNmH/E---3.1_3167806.p
0.22/0.47	% Version: 3.5.1-ho
0.22/0.47	% Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNHHA.
0.22/0.47	% Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.22/0.47	% Starting post_as_ho5 with 900s (5) cores
0.22/0.47	% Starting sh2lt with 180s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% Starting ehoh_best8_lambda with 180s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% Starting post_as_ho10 with 180s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% sh2lt with pid 3167820 completed with status 0
0.22/0.47	% Result found by sh2lt
0.22/0.47	% Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNHHA.
0.22/0.47	% Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.22/0.47	% Starting post_as_ho5 with 900s (5) cores
0.22/0.47	% Starting sh2lt with 180s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true))
0.22/0.47	% SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
0.22/0.47	% Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SHHFFSBN
0.22/0.47	% Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 180 seconds (180 total)
0.22/0.47	% Starting SubtermCWHack with 17s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% SubtermCWHack with pid 3167828 completed with status 10
0.22/0.47	% Starting sh2lt with 19s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% sh2lt with pid 3167834 completed with status 0
0.22/0.47	% Result found by sh2lt
0.22/0.47	% Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNHHA.
0.22/0.47	% Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.22/0.47	% Starting post_as_ho5 with 900s (5) cores
0.22/0.47	% Starting sh2lt with 180s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true))
0.22/0.47	% SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
0.22/0.47	% Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SHHFFSBN
0.22/0.47	% Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 180 seconds (180 total)
0.22/0.47	% Starting SubtermCWHack with 17s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% SubtermCWHack with pid 3167828 completed with status 10
0.22/0.47	% Starting sh2lt with 19s (1) cores
0.22/0.47	% Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
0.22/0.47	% Presaturation interreduction done
0.22/0.47	
0.22/0.47	% Proof found!
0.22/0.47	% SZS status Theorem
0.22/0.47	% SZS output start CNFRefutation
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_23, type, cP: $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_24, type, epred1_1: (($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o) > $i > $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_25, type, epred2_1: (($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o) > $i > $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_26, type, epred3_1: (($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o) > $i > $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_27, type, epred4_1: (($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o) > $i > $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_28, type, epred5_0: $i > $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(decl_29, type, epred6_0: $i > $o).
0.22/0.47	thf(cTHM120J_pme, conjecture, ?[X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((~((X1 @ (^[X2:$i]:(((~((cP)))|((cP))))) @ (^[X2:$i]:(((~((cP)))&((cP)))))))&![X3:$i > $o]:((X1 @ X3 @ X3)))&![X4:$i > $o, X5:$i > $o, X6:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ X4 @ X6)<=((X1 @ X4 @ X5)&(X1 @ X5 @ X6)))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.agnZUQsNmH/E---3.1_3167806.p', cTHM120J_pme)).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(?[X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((~((X1 @ (^[X2:$i]:(((~((cP)))|((cP))))) @ (^[X2:$i]:(((~((cP)))&((cP)))))))&![X3:$i > $o]:((X1 @ X3 @ X3)))&![X4:$i > $o, X5:$i > $o, X6:$i > $o]:(((X1 @ X4 @ X6)<=((X1 @ X4 @ X5)&(X1 @ X5 @ X6))))))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM120J_pme])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ~(?[X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((~((X1 @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))|((cP))))) @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))&((cP)))))))&![X3:$i > $o]:((X1 @ X3 @ X3)))&![X4:$i > $o, X5:$i > $o, X6:$i > $o]:((((X1 @ X4 @ X5)&(X1 @ X5 @ X6))=>(X1 @ X4 @ X6)))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ![X12:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((((X12 @ (epred2_1 @ X12) @ (epred3_1 @ X12))|((X12 @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))|((cP))))) @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))&((cP))))))|~(X12 @ (epred1_1 @ X12) @ (epred1_1 @ X12))))&((X12 @ (epred3_1 @ X12) @ (epred4_1 @ X12))|((X12 @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))|((cP))))) @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))&((cP))))))|~(X12 @ (epred1_1 @ X12) @ (epred1_1 @ X12)))))&(~(X12 @ (epred2_1 @ X12) @ (epred4_1 @ X12))|((X12 @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))|((cP))))) @ (^[Z0:$i]:(((~((cP)))&((cP))))))|~(X12 @ (epred1_1 @ X12) @ (epred1_1 @ X12)))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_4, plain, ![X18:$i]:(((epred6_0 @ X18)<=>(~((cP))&(cP)))), introduced(definition)).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_5, plain, ![X17:$i]:(((epred5_0 @ X17)<=>(~((cP))|(cP)))), introduced(definition)).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ![X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X1) @ (epred3_1 @ X1))|(((X1 @ epred5_0 @ epred6_0))=(($true)))|~((X1 @ (epred1_1 @ X1) @ (epred1_1 @ X1))))), inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]), c_0_4]), c_0_5])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_7, plain, ![X24:$i]:(((~(epred5_0 @ X24)|(~(cP)|(cP)))&(((cP)|(epred5_0 @ X24))&(~(cP)|(epred5_0 @ X24))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[])])])])])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_8, plain, ![X23:$i]:((((~(cP)|~(epred6_0 @ X23))&((cP)|~(epred6_0 @ X23)))&((cP)|~(cP)|(epred6_0 @ X23)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[])])])])])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, ![X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((((X1 @ epred5_0 @ epred6_0))=(($true)))|~((X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X1) @ (epred4_1 @ X1)))|~((X1 @ (epred1_1 @ X1) @ (epred1_1 @ X1))))), inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]), c_0_4]), c_0_5])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, ![X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X1) @ (epred3_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ epred5_0 @ epred6_0)|~((X1 @ (epred1_1 @ X1) @ (epred1_1 @ X1))))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_11, plain, ![X2:$i]:(((epred5_0 @ X2)|~((cP)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_12, plain, ![X2:$i]:(((cP)|(epred5_0 @ X2))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_13, plain, ![X2:$i]:(((cP)|~((epred6_0 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_14, plain, ![X2:$i]:((~((cP))|~((epred6_0 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_15, negated_conjecture, ![X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ epred5_0 @ epred6_0)|~((X1 @ (epred1_1 @ X1) @ (epred1_1 @ X1)))|~((X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X1) @ (epred4_1 @ X1))))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_16, negated_conjecture, ![X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ (epred3_1 @ X1) @ (epred4_1 @ X1))|(((X1 @ epred5_0 @ epred6_0))=(($true)))|~((X1 @ (epred1_1 @ X1) @ (epred1_1 @ X1))))), inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]), c_0_4]), c_0_5])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_17, negated_conjecture, (((epred3_1 @ $eq)=(epred2_1 @ $eq))|((epred6_0)=(epred5_0))), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[])]), c_0_10])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_18, plain, ![X2:$i]:((epred5_0 @ X2)), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_12])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_19, plain, ![X2:$i]:(~((epred6_0 @ X2))), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_13, c_0_14])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_20, negated_conjecture, (((epred6_0)=(epred5_0))|((epred4_1 @ $eq)!=(epred2_1 @ $eq))), inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[])]), c_0_15])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_21, negated_conjecture, ![X1:($i > $o) > ($i > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ (epred3_1 @ X1) @ (epred4_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ epred5_0 @ epred6_0)|~((X1 @ (epred1_1 @ X1) @ (epred1_1 @ X1))))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_16])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_22, negated_conjecture, ((epred3_1 @ $eq)=(epred2_1 @ $eq)), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]), c_0_18]), c_0_19])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_23, negated_conjecture, ((epred4_1 @ $eq)!=(epred2_1 @ $eq)), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]), c_0_18]), c_0_19])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_24, negated_conjecture, ((epred6_0)=(epred5_0)), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(primitive_enumeration,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[])]), c_0_21]), c_0_22]), c_0_23])).
0.22/0.47	thf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_24]), c_0_18]), c_0_19]), ['proof']).
0.22/0.47	% SZS output end CNFRefutation
0.22/0.47	% Parsed axioms                        : 2
0.22/0.47	% Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1
0.22/0.47	% Initial clauses                      : 9
0.22/0.47	% Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
0.22/0.47	% Initial clauses in saturation        : 7
0.22/0.47	% Processed clauses                    : 25
0.22/0.47	% ...of these trivial                  : 1
0.22/0.47	% ...subsumed                          : 1
0.22/0.47	% ...remaining for further processing  : 23
0.22/0.47	% Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
0.22/0.47	% Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
0.22/0.47	% Backward-subsumed                    : 4
0.22/0.47	% Backward-rewritten                   : 3
0.22/0.47	% Generated clauses                    : 49
0.22/0.47	% ...of the previous two non-redundant : 35
0.22/0.47	% ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
0.22/0.47	% Contextual simplify-reflections      : 2
0.22/0.47	% Paramodulations                      : 4
0.22/0.47	% Factorizations                       : 0
0.22/0.47	% NegExts                              : 2
0.22/0.47	% Equation resolutions                 : 0
0.22/0.47	% Disequality decompositions           : 0
0.22/0.47	% Total rewrite steps                  : 10
0.22/0.47	% ...of those cached                   : 2
0.22/0.47	% Propositional unsat checks           : 0
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional check models        : 0
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional clauses             : 0
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
0.22/0.47	%    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
0.22/0.47	%    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
0.22/0.47	%    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
0.22/0.47	%    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
0.22/0.47	% Current number of processed clauses  : 9
0.22/0.47	%    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
0.22/0.47	%    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
0.22/0.47	%    Negative unit clauses             : 2
0.22/0.47	%    Non-unit-clauses                  : 4
0.22/0.47	% Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
0.22/0.47	% ...number of literals in the above   : 46
0.22/0.47	% Current number of archived formulas  : 0
0.22/0.47	% Current number of archived clauses   : 14
0.22/0.47	% Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5
0.22/0.47	% Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
0.22/0.47	% Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 2
0.22/0.47	% Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8
0.22/0.47	% Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
0.22/0.47	% BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
0.22/0.47	% BW rewrite match successes           : 3
0.22/0.47	% Condensation attempts                : 0
0.22/0.47	% Condensation successes               : 0
0.22/0.47	% Termbank termtop insertions          : 4737
0.22/0.47	% Search garbage collected termcells   : 179
0.22/0.47	
0.22/0.47	% -------------------------------------------------
0.22/0.47	% User time                : 0.007 s
0.22/0.47	% System time              : 0.004 s
0.22/0.47	% Total time               : 0.011 s
0.22/0.47	% Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
0.22/0.47	
0.22/0.47	% -------------------------------------------------
0.22/0.47	% User time                : 0.008 s
0.22/0.47	% System time              : 0.009 s
0.22/0.47	% Total time               : 0.017 s
0.22/0.47	% Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
0.22/0.47	% E exiting
0.22/0.47	EOF