%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : FLD030-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n002.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 12:22:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 15 RR)
% Number of literals : 24 ( 0 equ; 12 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(symmetry_of_equality,axiom,
( ~ equalish(X2,X1)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',symmetry_of_equality) ).
cnf(multiply_not_equal_to_multiply_5,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(multiply(d,b),multiply(a,b)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',multiply_not_equal_to_multiply_5) ).
cnf(compatibility_of_equality_and_multiplication,axiom,
( ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',compatibility_of_equality_and_multiplication) ).
cnf(a_equals_d_4,negated_conjecture,
equalish(a,d),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_equals_d_4) ).
cnf(b_is_defined,hypothesis,
defined(b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_is_defined) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ equalish(X2,X1)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[symmetry_of_equality]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(multiply(d,b),multiply(a,b)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[multiply_not_equal_to_multiply_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[compatibility_of_equality_and_multiplication]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ equalish(X2,X1)
| equalish(X1,X2) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
equalish(a,d),
a_equals_d_4 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ equalish(multiply(d,b),multiply(a,b)),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ equalish(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| equalish(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2)) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
defined(b),
b_is_defined ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
equalish(d,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : FLD030-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:41:17 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.44 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
% 0.11/0.49 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3628724 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.11/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.49 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.49 % Search class: FGUNF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.49 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S with 296s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 269s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting G-E--_107_B00_00_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S08BN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3628730 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.11/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.49 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.49 % Search class: FGUNF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.49 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.49 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.11/0.49 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.11/0.49
% 0.11/0.49 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.49 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.49 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.49 % Parsed axioms : 32
% 0.11/0.49 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Initial clauses : 32
% 0.11/0.49 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Initial clauses in saturation : 32
% 0.11/0.49 % Processed clauses : 72
% 0.11/0.49 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.11/0.49 % ...remaining for further processing : 70
% 0.11/0.49 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Generated clauses : 75
% 0.11/0.49 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 62
% 0.11/0.49 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Paramodulations : 75
% 0.11/0.49 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Total rewrite steps : 16
% 0.11/0.49 % ...of those cached : 8
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.49 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.49 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.49 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.49 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.49 % Current number of processed clauses : 38
% 0.11/0.49 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 13
% 0.11/0.49 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.11/0.49 % Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.11/0.49 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 52
% 0.11/0.49 % ...number of literals in the above : 147
% 0.11/0.49 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Current number of archived clauses : 32
% 0.11/0.49 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 169
% 0.11/0.49 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 153
% 0.11/0.49 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.11/0.49 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 36
% 0.11/0.49 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.49 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2071
% 0.11/0.49 % Search garbage collected termcells : 71
% 0.11/0.49
% 0.11/0.49 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.49 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.11/0.49 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.11/0.49 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.11/0.49 % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.11/0.49
% 0.11/0.49 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.49 % User time : 0.041 s
% 0.11/0.49 % System time : 0.017 s
% 0.11/0.49 % Total time : 0.058 s
% 0.11/0.49 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.11/0.49 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------