%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : BOO069-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n013.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 12:07:20 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.17s 0.50s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 11
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 17 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 61 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
multiply(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2),inverse(multiply(multiply(X3,X4,X5),X6,multiply(X3,X4,X7))),multiply(X4,multiply(X7,X6,X5),X3)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
cnf(prove_tba_axioms_3,negated_conjecture,
multiply(a,b,inverse(b)) != a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_tba_axioms_3) ).
cnf(c_0_2,axiom,
multiply(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2),inverse(multiply(multiply(X3,X4,X5),X6,multiply(X3,X4,X7))),multiply(X4,multiply(X7,X6,X5),X3)) = X2,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_3,plain,
multiply(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2),inverse(multiply(multiply(X3,X4,multiply(X5,multiply(X6,X7,X8),X9)),inverse(multiply(multiply(X9,X5,X8),X7,multiply(X9,X5,X6))),multiply(X3,X4,multiply(X10,inverse(X10),X11)))),multiply(X4,X11,X3)) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
multiply(multiply(X1,X2,X3),inverse(multiply(multiply(X4,X5,X6),X7,multiply(X4,X5,X8))),multiply(X5,multiply(X8,X7,X6),X4)) = multiply(X2,multiply(X3,inverse(multiply(X1,X2,X9)),X9),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
multiply(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2),inverse(multiply(X3,inverse(X3),multiply(X4,inverse(X4),X5))),multiply(inverse(X3),X5,X3)) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_3]),c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
multiply(inverse(X1),multiply(X2,inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X3)),X3),X1) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
multiply(inverse(X1),X2,X1) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_5]),c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(X2,inverse(X2),X3)),X3) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2)) = inverse(X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
multiply(multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2),inverse(multiply(multiply(X3,inverse(X3),X4),inverse(multiply(X3,inverse(X3),X4)),multiply(X3,inverse(X3),X5))),X5) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(X2),X2) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(X1),X2) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_9]),c_0_9]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
multiply(a,b,inverse(b)) != a,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_tba_axioms_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
inverse(inverse(X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
multiply(a,b,inverse(b)) != a,
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
multiply(X1,X2,inverse(X2)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : BOO069-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 13:51:35 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.43 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
% 0.17/0.50 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % new_bool_3 with pid 922229 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.17/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.50 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.50 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.50 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % SubtermCWHack with pid 922235 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.17/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.50 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.50 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.50 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.50 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.50 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.17/0.50
% 0.17/0.50 % Proof found!
% 0.17/0.50 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.17/0.50 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.50 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.17/0.50 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Initial clauses : 2
% 0.17/0.50 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.17/0.50 % Processed clauses : 52
% 0.17/0.50 % ...of these trivial : 6
% 0.17/0.50 % ...subsumed : 18
% 0.17/0.50 % ...remaining for further processing : 28
% 0.17/0.50 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Backward-rewritten : 19
% 0.17/0.50 % Generated clauses : 1696
% 0.17/0.50 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1570
% 0.17/0.50 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Paramodulations : 1696
% 0.17/0.50 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Total rewrite steps : 445
% 0.17/0.50 % ...of those cached : 228
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.50 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.50 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.50 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.50 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.50 % Current number of processed clauses : 9
% 0.17/0.50 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.17/0.50 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.17/0.50 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1508
% 0.17/0.50 % ...number of literals in the above : 1508
% 0.17/0.50 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Current number of archived clauses : 19
% 0.17/0.50 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.17/0.50 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 120
% 0.17/0.50 % BW rewrite match attempts : 169
% 0.17/0.50 % BW rewrite match successes : 31
% 0.17/0.50 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/0.50 % Termbank termtop insertions : 48917
% 0.17/0.50 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.17/0.50
% 0.17/0.50 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.50 % User time : 0.034 s
% 0.17/0.50 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.17/0.50 % Total time : 0.039 s
% 0.17/0.50 % Maximum resident set size: 3376 pages
% 0.17/0.50
% 0.17/0.50 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.50 % User time : 0.037 s
% 0.17/0.50 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.17/0.50 % Total time : 0.047 s
% 0.17/0.50 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.17/0.50 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------