%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : BOO034-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n016.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 12:07:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 10.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 28 ( 28 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% Number of literals : 28 ( 27 equ; 5 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 7 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 57 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(associativity,axiom,
multiply(multiply(X1,X2,X3),X4,multiply(X1,X2,X5)) = multiply(X1,X2,multiply(X3,X4,X5)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/BOO001-0.ax',associativity) ).
cnf(ternary_multiply_1,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2,X2) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/BOO001-0.ax',ternary_multiply_1) ).
cnf(right_inverse,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2,inverse(X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/BOO001-0.ax',right_inverse) ).
cnf(ternary_multiply_2,axiom,
multiply(X1,X1,X2) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/BOO001-0.ax',ternary_multiply_2) ).
cnf(left_inverse,axiom,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1,X2) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/BOO001-0.ax',left_inverse) ).
cnf(prove_single_axiom,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(a,inverse(a),b),inverse(multiply(multiply(c,d,e),f,multiply(c,d,g))),multiply(d,multiply(g,f,e),c)) != b,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_single_axiom) ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
multiply(multiply(X1,X2,X3),X4,multiply(X1,X2,X5)) = multiply(X1,X2,multiply(X3,X4,X5)),
associativity ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2,X2) = X2,
ternary_multiply_1 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
multiply(multiply(X1,X2,X3),X4,X2) = multiply(X1,X2,multiply(X3,X4,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2,inverse(X2)) = X1,
right_inverse ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
multiply(X1,X2,multiply(inverse(X2),X3,X2)) = multiply(X1,X3,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
multiply(X1,X1,X2) = X1,
ternary_multiply_2 ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1,X2) = X2,
left_inverse ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(X2),X2) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(a,inverse(a),b),inverse(multiply(multiply(c,d,e),f,multiply(c,d,g))),multiply(d,multiply(g,f,e),c)) != b,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_single_axiom]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
inverse(inverse(X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
multiply(multiply(inverse(X1),X2,X3),X2,X1) = multiply(inverse(X1),X2,X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_10]),c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(a,inverse(a),b),inverse(multiply(multiply(c,d,e),f,multiply(c,d,g))),multiply(d,multiply(g,f,e),c)) != b,
c_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
multiply(inverse(X1),X2,X1) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_7]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
multiply(X1,X2,X1) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_11]),c_0_11]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
multiply(b,inverse(multiply(c,d,multiply(e,f,g))),multiply(d,multiply(g,f,e),c)) != b,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
multiply(X1,X2,X3) = multiply(X1,X3,X2),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
multiply(multiply(X1,X2,X3),X4,X1) = multiply(X1,X2,multiply(X3,X4,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
multiply(X1,X2,inverse(X1)) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
multiply(b,multiply(d,c,multiply(g,e,f)),inverse(multiply(c,d,multiply(e,f,g)))) != b,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_22]),c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
multiply(X1,X2,X3) = multiply(X3,X1,X2),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]),c_0_26]),c_0_22]),c_0_26]),c_0_22]),c_0_22]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : BOO034-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/10.41 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.12/10.41 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/10.41 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/10.41 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/10.41 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/10.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/10.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/10.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 13:54:05 UTC 2026
% 0.12/10.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/10.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/10.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/10.49 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/10.55 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/10.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/10.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2582785 completed with status 0
% 0.19/10.55 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.19/10.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/10.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/10.55 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/10.55 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.19/10.55 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_208_B02_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2582796 completed with status 0
% 0.19/10.55 % Result found by H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.19/10.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/10.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/10.55 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/10.55 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.19/10.55 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting G-E--_208_B02_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Starting H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/10.55 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.19/10.55 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/10.55
% 0.19/10.55 % Proof found!
% 0.19/10.56 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/10.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/10.56 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.19/10.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.19/10.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.19/10.56 % Processed clauses : 31
% 0.19/10.56 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.19/10.56 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 30
% 0.19/10.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Backward-rewritten : 10
% 0.19/10.56 % Generated clauses : 331
% 0.19/10.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 184
% 0.19/10.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Paramodulations : 331
% 0.19/10.56 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Total rewrite steps : 260
% 0.19/10.56 % ...of those cached : 127
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/10.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/10.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/10.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/10.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/10.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 14
% 0.19/10.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.19/10.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.19/10.56 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 164
% 0.19/10.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 164
% 0.19/10.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 16
% 0.19/10.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13
% 0.19/10.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 298
% 0.19/10.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 129
% 0.19/10.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/10.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2468
% 0.19/10.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.19/10.56
% 0.19/10.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/10.56 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.19/10.56 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.19/10.56 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.19/10.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3328 pages
% 0.19/10.56
% 0.19/10.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/10.56 % User time : 0.043 s
% 0.19/10.56 % System time : 0.024 s
% 0.19/10.56 % Total time : 0.067 s
% 0.19/10.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.19/10.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------