%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP174-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n012.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 12:42:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.06s 10.58s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.06s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 8 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 17 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(monotony_glb2,axiom,
multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3) = greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X3),multiply(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',monotony_glb2) ).
cnf(left_identity,axiom,
multiply(identity,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-0.ax',left_identity) ).
cnf(symmetry_of_glb,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',symmetry_of_glb) ).
cnf(left_inverse,axiom,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1) = identity,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-0.ax',left_inverse) ).
cnf(prove_p05b,negated_conjecture,
identity != a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_p05b) ).
cnf(p05b_2,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,inverse(a)) = inverse(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p05b_2) ).
cnf(p05b_1,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,a) = a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p05b_1) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3) = greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X3),multiply(X2,X3)),
monotony_glb2 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
multiply(identity,X1) = X1,
left_identity ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_glb ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,multiply(X2,X1)) = multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X2,identity),X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1) = identity,
left_inverse ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
identity != a,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_p05b]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
multiply(greatest_lower_bound(identity,inverse(X1)),X1) = greatest_lower_bound(X1,identity),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,inverse(a)) = inverse(a),
p05b_2 ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,a) = a,
p05b_1 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
identity != a,
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_11]),c_0_9]),c_0_15]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01 % Problem : GRP174-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.00/0.02 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.06/10.53 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.06/10.53 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.06/10.53 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.06/10.53 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.06/10.53 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.06/10.53 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.06/10.53 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.06/10.53 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:04:05 UTC 2026
% 0.06/10.53 % CPUTime :
% 0.06/10.53 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.06/10.56 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.06/10.56 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
% 0.06/10.58 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.06/10.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.06/10.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 752763 completed with status 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.06/10.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.06/10.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.06/10.58 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.06/10.58 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.06/10.58 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 136s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 752770 completed with status 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.06/10.58 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.06/10.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.06/10.58 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.06/10.58 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.06/10.58 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 136s (1) cores
% 0.06/10.58 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.06/10.58 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.06/10.58
% 0.06/10.58 % Proof found!
% 0.06/10.58 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.06/10.58 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.06/10.58 % Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.06/10.58 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Initial clauses : 18
% 0.06/10.58 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Initial clauses in saturation : 18
% 0.06/10.58 % Processed clauses : 251
% 0.06/10.58 % ...of these trivial : 74
% 0.06/10.58 % ...subsumed : 54
% 0.06/10.58 % ...remaining for further processing : 123
% 0.06/10.58 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.06/10.58 % Generated clauses : 2727
% 0.06/10.58 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1395
% 0.06/10.58 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Paramodulations : 2727
% 0.06/10.58 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % NegExts : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Total rewrite steps : 2567
% 0.06/10.58 % ...of those cached : 1756
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.06/10.58 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.06/10.58 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.06/10.58 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.06/10.58 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.06/10.58 % Current number of processed clauses : 99
% 0.06/10.58 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 92
% 0.06/10.58 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.06/10.58 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.06/10.58 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1159
% 0.06/10.58 % ...number of literals in the above : 1159
% 0.06/10.58 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Current number of archived clauses : 24
% 0.06/10.58 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 15
% 0.06/10.58 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % BW rewrite match attempts : 226
% 0.06/10.58 % BW rewrite match successes : 144
% 0.06/10.58 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.06/10.58 % Termbank termtop insertions : 21441
% 0.06/10.58 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.06/10.58
% 0.06/10.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.06/10.58 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.06/10.58 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.06/10.58 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.06/10.58 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.06/10.58
% 0.06/10.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.06/10.58 % User time : 0.055 s
% 0.06/10.58 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.06/10.58 % Total time : 0.068 s
% 0.06/10.58 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.06/10.58 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------