%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : ALG425-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Sep 24 12:02:08 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.25s 0.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 6 ( 6 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% Number of literals : 6 ( 5 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 3 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)) != c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(v_pa____,X1,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_CHAINED_0,axiom,
c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)) = c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(v_pa____,c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(c_Polynomial_OpCons(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),v_c____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0) ).
cnf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)) != c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(v_pa____,X1,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,axiom,
c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)) = c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(v_pa____,c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(c_Polynomial_OpCons(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),v_c____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),
cls_CHAINED_0 ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_qa____,v_na____,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)) != c_HOL_Otimes__class_Otimes(v_pa____,X1,tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)),
c_0_2 ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : ALG425-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.40 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.40 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.40 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.40 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/0.40 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/0.40 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.40 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.40 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 13:20:55 UTC 2026
% 0.16/0.41 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.41 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.47 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.47 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/0.67 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 956933 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.25/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.25/0.67 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.25/0.67 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.67 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with pid 956945 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N
% 0.25/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.25/0.67 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.25/0.67 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.67 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.67 % Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% 0.25/0.67 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.25/0.67
% 0.25/0.67 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.67 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.25/0.67 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.67 % Parsed axioms : 793
% 0.25/0.67 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Initial clauses : 793
% 0.25/0.67 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.25/0.67 % Initial clauses in saturation : 792
% 0.25/0.67 % Processed clauses : 202
% 0.25/0.67 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.25/0.67 % ...subsumed : 15
% 0.25/0.67 % ...remaining for further processing : 181
% 0.25/0.67 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.25/0.67 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.67 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.67 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.67 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.67 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.67 % Current number of processed clauses : 181
% 0.25/0.67 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 73
% 0.25/0.67 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.25/0.67 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.25/0.67 % Non-unit-clauses : 101
% 0.25/0.67 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 590
% 0.25/0.67 % ...number of literals in the above : 1748
% 0.25/0.67 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.25/0.67 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1351
% 0.25/0.67 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1205
% 0.25/0.67 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 9
% 0.25/0.67 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.25/0.67 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % BW rewrite match attempts : 18
% 0.25/0.67 % BW rewrite match successes : 12
% 0.25/0.67 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.67 % Termbank termtop insertions : 25063
% 0.25/0.67 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1447
% 0.25/0.67
% 0.25/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.67 % User time : 0.049 s
% 0.25/0.67 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.67 % Total time : 0.060 s
% 0.25/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 5212 pages
% 0.25/0.67
% 0.25/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.67 % User time : 0.219 s
% 0.25/0.67 % System time : 0.042 s
% 0.25/0.67 % Total time : 0.261 s
% 0.25/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.25/0.67 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------