%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : FLD023-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n005.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 12:22:42 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.42s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.42s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 28 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 28 RR)
% Number of literals : 53 ( 0 equ; 28 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 33 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(symmetry_of_equality,axiom,
( ~ equalish(X2,X1)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',symmetry_of_equality) ).
cnf(transitivity_of_equality,axiom,
( ~ equalish(X3,X2)
| ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',transitivity_of_equality) ).
cnf(existence_of_inverse_addition,axiom,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',existence_of_inverse_addition) ).
cnf(compatibility_of_equality_and_addition,axiom,
( ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',compatibility_of_equality_and_addition) ).
cnf(a_equals_b_3,negated_conjecture,
equalish(a,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_equals_b_3) ).
cnf(a_is_defined,hypothesis,
defined(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_is_defined) ).
cnf(well_definedness_of_additive_inverse,axiom,
( ~ defined(X1)
| defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',well_definedness_of_additive_inverse) ).
cnf(additive_identity_not_equal_to_add_4,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(additive_identity,add(b,additive_inverse(a))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',additive_identity_not_equal_to_add_4) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ equalish(X2,X1)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[symmetry_of_equality]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ equalish(X3,X2)
| ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transitivity_of_equality]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[existence_of_inverse_addition]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[compatibility_of_equality_and_addition]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ equalish(X2,X1)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
equalish(a,b),
a_equals_b_3 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ equalish(X3,X2)
| ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2)) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
equalish(b,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ equalish(X1,add(X2,additive_inverse(X2)))
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(X1,additive_identity) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(b,X1),add(a,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
defined(a),
a_is_defined ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[well_definedness_of_additive_inverse]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
( ~ defined(additive_inverse(a))
| equalish(add(b,additive_inverse(a)),additive_identity) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20])]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
c_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(additive_identity,add(b,additive_inverse(a))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[additive_identity_not_equal_to_add_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
equalish(add(b,additive_inverse(a)),additive_identity),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),c_0_20])]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(additive_identity,add(b,additive_inverse(a))),
c_0_24 ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_25]),c_0_26]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : FLD023-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:38:18 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.41 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
% 0.42/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.42/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.42/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3846423 completed with status 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.42/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.42/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.42/0.47 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.42/0.47 % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.42/0.47 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with 136s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting U----_206e_02_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C02CMA_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with pid 3846429 completed with status 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c
% 0.42/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.42/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.42/0.47 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.42/0.47 % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.42/0.47 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with 136s (1) cores
% 0.42/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.42/0.47 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.42/0.47
% 0.42/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.42/0.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.42/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.42/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 31
% 0.42/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Initial clauses : 31
% 0.42/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 31
% 0.42/0.47 % Processed clauses : 364
% 0.42/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 31
% 0.42/0.47 % ...subsumed : 14
% 0.42/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 319
% 0.42/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.42/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 9
% 0.42/0.47 % Generated clauses : 1887
% 0.42/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1303
% 0.42/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Paramodulations : 1885
% 0.42/0.47 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.42/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 1042
% 0.42/0.47 % ...of those cached : 919
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.42/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.42/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.42/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.42/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.42/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 278
% 0.42/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 138
% 0.42/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.42/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 138
% 0.42/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1000
% 0.42/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 2224
% 0.42/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 41
% 0.42/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2812
% 0.42/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2394
% 0.42/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 14
% 0.42/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 213
% 0.42/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 46
% 0.42/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 10
% 0.42/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.42/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 23918
% 0.42/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 71
% 0.42/0.47
% 0.42/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.42/0.47 % User time : 0.040 s
% 0.42/0.47 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.42/0.47 % Total time : 0.048 s
% 0.42/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.42/0.47
% 0.42/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.42/0.47 % User time : 0.168 s
% 0.42/0.47 % System time : 0.027 s
% 0.42/0.47 % Total time : 0.195 s
% 0.42/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.42/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------