%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP028-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 12:37:29 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.25s 0.53s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 14 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 9 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 0 equ; 15 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 0 con; 1-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 40 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(associativity2,axiom,
( ~ product(X1,X5,X6)
| ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
| ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
| product(X3,X4,X6) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP002-0.ax',associativity2) ).
cnf(right_soln,hypothesis,
product(X1,right_solution(X1,X2),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',right_soln) ).
cnf(left_soln,hypothesis,
product(left_solution(X1,X2),X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',left_soln) ).
cnf(prove_there_is_a_right_identity,negated_conjecture,
~ product(not_identity(X1),X1,not_identity(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_there_is_a_right_identity) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ product(X1,X5,X6)
| ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
| ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
| product(X3,X4,X6) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[associativity2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ product(X1,X5,X6)
| ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
| ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
| product(X3,X4,X6) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,hypothesis,
product(X1,right_solution(X1,X2),X2),
right_soln ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
( ~ product(X5,X2,X1)
| ~ product(X5,X3,X4)
| product(X1,right_solution(X2,X3),X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
product(left_solution(X1,X2),X1,X2),
left_soln ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ product(not_identity(X1),X1,not_identity(X1)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_there_is_a_right_identity]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
( ~ product(left_solution(X3,X4),X2,X1)
| product(X1,right_solution(X2,X3),X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ product(not_identity(X1),X1,not_identity(X1)),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
product(X1,right_solution(X2,X2),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : GRP028-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.43 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 19:54:48 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.51 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.51 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
% 0.25/0.53 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % new_bool_3 with pid 1622101 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.25/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.53 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.53 % Search class: FHUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.53 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1622106 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.53 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.53 % Search class: FHUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.53 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.53 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.53
% 0.25/0.53 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.53 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.25/0.53 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.53 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.25/0.53 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.25/0.53 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.25/0.53 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.25/0.53 % Processed clauses : 13
% 0.25/0.53 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % ...remaining for further processing : 13
% 0.25/0.53 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Generated clauses : 19
% 0.25/0.53 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11
% 0.25/0.53 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Paramodulations : 19
% 0.25/0.53 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.53 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.53 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.53 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.53 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.53 % Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.25/0.53 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.25/0.53 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/0.53 % Non-unit-clauses : 9
% 0.25/0.53 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.25/0.53 % ...number of literals in the above : 9
% 0.25/0.53 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 65
% 0.25/0.53 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 55
% 0.25/0.53 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.25/0.53 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.25/0.53 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.53 % Termbank termtop insertions : 390
% 0.25/0.53 % Search garbage collected termcells : 21
% 0.25/0.53
% 0.25/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.53 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.53 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.25/0.53 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.25/0.53
% 0.25/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.53 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.53 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.25/0.53 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.25/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.53 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------