TSTP Solution File: SYO304^5 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : SYO304^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Tue May 21 08:45:34 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.48s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.12  % Problem    : SYO304^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.10/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n014.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   : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime   : Mon May 20 09:20:53 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.46  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.46  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=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.48  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.48  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNHHA.
% 0.20/0.48  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting post_as_ho5 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting ehoh_best8_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # sh2lt with pid 20669 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Result found by sh2lt
% 0.20/0.48  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNHHA.
% 0.20/0.48  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting post_as_ho5 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.20/0.48  # Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SHHFFSBN
% 0.20/0.48  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 135s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # ho_unfolding_3 with pid 20679 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Result found by ho_unfolding_3
% 0.20/0.48  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNHHA.
% 0.20/0.48  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting post_as_ho5 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.20/0.48  # Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SHHFFSBN
% 0.20/0.48  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.48  # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 135s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.48  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.48  
% 0.20/0.48  # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.48  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.48  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.20/0.48  thf(decl_sort1, type, a: $tType).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(decl_22, type, epred1_0: (a > a > $o) > $o).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(decl_23, type, epred2_0: a > a > $o).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(decl_24, type, epred3_2: a > a > a > $o).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(decl_25, type, esk1_0: a).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(decl_27, type, esk3_0: a).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(cE2_eq__pme, conjecture, ![X1:(a > a > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ (^[X2:a, X3:a]:(![X4:a > $o]:(((X4 @ X2)=>(X4 @ X3))))))=>(X1 @ (^[X2:a, X3:a]:(((X2)=(X3))))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', cE2_eq__pme)).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1:(a > a > $o) > $o]:(((X1 @ (^[Z0/* 19 */:a, Z1:a]:(![X4:a > $o]:((X4 @ Z0=>X4 @ Z1)))))=>(X1 @ (^[Z0/* 19 */:a, Z1:a]:(((Z0)=(Z1)))))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cE2_eq__pme])])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ((epred1_0 @ (^[Z0/* 19 */:a, Z1:a]:(![X4:a > $o]:((X4 @ Z0=>X4 @ Z1)))))&~(epred1_0 @ $eq)), inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_3, plain, ![X9:a, X8:a]:(((epred2_0 @ X8 @ X9)<=>![X7:a > $o]:(((X7 @ X8)=>(X7 @ X9))))), introduced(definition)).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, (((epred1_0 @ epred2_0))=(($true))), inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]), c_0_3])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ~((epred1_0 @ $eq)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, (epred1_0 @ epred2_0), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_7, plain, (($eq)!=(epred2_0)), inference(ext_sup,[status(thm)],[c_0_5, c_0_6])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_8, plain, ![X10:a, X11:a, X12:a > $o, X13:a, X14:a]:(((~(epred2_0 @ X11 @ X10)|(~(X12 @ X11)|(X12 @ X10)))&(((epred3_2 @ X13 @ X14 @ X14)|(epred2_0 @ X14 @ X13))&(~(epred3_2 @ X13 @ X14 @ X13)|(epred2_0 @ X14 @ X13))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[])])])])])])])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_9, plain, (($eq @ esk1_0)!=(epred2_0 @ esk1_0)), inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_10, plain, ![X4:a > $o, X3:a, X2:a]:(((X4 @ X3)|~((epred2_0 @ X2 @ X3))|~((X4 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_11, plain, (((esk1_0)=(esk3_0))<~>(epred2_0 @ esk1_0 @ esk3_0)), inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_12, plain, ![X2:a, X3:a]:((((X2)=(X3))|~((epred2_0 @ X2 @ X3)))), inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]), c_0_10])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_13, plain, (((esk1_0)=(esk3_0))|(epred2_0 @ esk1_0 @ esk3_0)), inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_14, plain, (((esk1_0)!=(esk3_0))|~((epred2_0 @ esk1_0 @ esk3_0))), inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_15, plain, ((esk1_0)=(esk3_0)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12, c_0_13])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_16, plain, ![X3:a, X2:a]:(((epred2_0 @ X3 @ X2)|~((epred3_2 @ X2 @ X3 @ X2)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_17, plain, ![X3:a, X2:a]:(((epred3_2 @ X2 @ X3 @ X3)|(epred2_0 @ X3 @ X2))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_18, plain, ~((epred2_0 @ esk3_0 @ esk3_0)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14, c_0_15]), c_0_15])])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_19, plain, ![X2:a]:((epred2_0 @ X2 @ X2)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_17])).
% 0.20/0.48  thf(c_0_20, plain, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18, c_0_19])]), ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.48  # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.20/0.48  # Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.20/0.48  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1
% 0.20/0.48  # Initial clauses                      : 5
% 0.20/0.48  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.20/0.48  # Processed clauses                    : 29
% 0.20/0.48  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # ...subsumed                          : 2
% 0.20/0.48  # ...remaining for further processing  : 27
% 0.20/0.48  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Backward-rewritten                   : 7
% 0.20/0.48  # Generated clauses                    : 21
% 0.20/0.48  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 23
% 0.20/0.48  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 2
% 0.20/0.48  # Paramodulations                      : 8
% 0.20/0.48  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # NegExts                              : 4
% 0.20/0.48  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Total rewrite steps                  : 12
% 0.20/0.48  # ...of those cached                   : 9
% 0.20/0.48  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48  # Current number of processed clauses  : 12
% 0.20/0.48  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 4
% 0.20/0.48  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.48  #    Negative unit clauses             : 4
% 0.20/0.48  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 4
% 0.20/0.48  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.20/0.48  # ...number of literals in the above   : 8
% 0.20/0.48  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Current number of archived clauses   : 15
% 0.20/0.48  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 18
% 0.20/0.48  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14
% 0.20/0.48  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 3
% 0.20/0.48  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 12
% 0.20/0.48  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 8
% 0.20/0.48  # BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.20/0.48  # Condensation attempts                : 29
% 0.20/0.48  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.20/0.48  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 859
% 0.20/0.48  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 162
% 0.20/0.48  
% 0.20/0.48  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.48  # User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.48  # System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.48  # Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.48  # Maximum resident set size: 1796 pages
% 0.20/0.48  
% 0.20/0.48  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.48  # User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.48  # System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.20/0.48  # Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.20/0.48  # Maximum resident set size: 1728 pages
% 0.20/0.48  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.48  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------