%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP175-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 12:38:51 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 10.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 26 ( 26 unt; 0 nHn; 8 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 25 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(glb_absorbtion,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',glb_absorbtion) ).
cnf(symmetry_of_lub,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,X2) = least_upper_bound(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',symmetry_of_lub) ).
cnf(p06c_1,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(identity,b) = b,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p06c_1) ).
cnf(monotony_glb2,axiom,
multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3) = greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X3),multiply(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',monotony_glb2) ).
cnf(left_identity,axiom,
multiply(identity,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',symmetry_of_glb) ).
cnf(prove_p06c,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,multiply(inverse(a),multiply(b,a))) != identity,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_p06c) ).
cnf(monotony_glb1,axiom,
multiply(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)) = greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',monotony_glb1) ).
cnf(left_inverse,axiom,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1) = identity,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-0.ax',left_inverse) ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X1,X2)) = X1,
glb_absorbtion ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,X2) = least_upper_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_lub ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(identity,b) = b,
p06c_1 ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3) = greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X3),multiply(X2,X3)),
monotony_glb2 ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
multiply(identity,X1) = X1,
left_identity ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_glb ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(b,identity) = b,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,multiply(inverse(a),multiply(b,a))) != identity,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_p06c]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
multiply(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)) = greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3)),
monotony_glb1 ).
cnf(c_0_19,axiom,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1) = identity,
left_inverse ).
cnf(c_0_20,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_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(b,identity) = identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,multiply(inverse(a),multiply(b,a))) != identity,
c_0_17 ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
greatest_lower_bound(identity,multiply(inverse(X1),X2)) = multiply(inverse(X1),greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,multiply(b,X1)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),c_0_14]),c_0_24]),c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GRP175-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/10.37 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.10/10.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/10.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/10.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/10.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/10.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/10.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/10.37 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:04:01 UTC 2026
% 0.10/10.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/10.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/10.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/10.42 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
% 0.13/10.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/10.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/10.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2229772 completed with status 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.13/10.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/10.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/10.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/10.45 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/10.45 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting G-E--_060_C18_F1_PI_SE_CS_SP_CO_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting U----_043_B31_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with pid 2229780 completed with status 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Result found by H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S
% 0.13/10.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/10.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/10.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/10.45 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/10.45 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Starting H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/10.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/10.45
% 0.13/10.45 % Proof found!
% 0.13/10.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/10.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/10.45 % Parsed axioms : 17
% 0.13/10.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Initial clauses : 17
% 0.13/10.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 17
% 0.13/10.45 % Processed clauses : 153
% 0.13/10.45 % ...of these trivial : 40
% 0.13/10.45 % ...subsumed : 28
% 0.13/10.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 85
% 0.13/10.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.13/10.45 % Generated clauses : 1807
% 0.13/10.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 979
% 0.13/10.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Paramodulations : 1807
% 0.13/10.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Total rewrite steps : 1812
% 0.13/10.45 % ...of those cached : 1218
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/10.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/10.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/10.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/10.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/10.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 79
% 0.13/10.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 71
% 0.13/10.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 8
% 0.13/10.45 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 837
% 0.13/10.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 837
% 0.13/10.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.13/10.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.13/10.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 66
% 0.13/10.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 29
% 0.13/10.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/10.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 13663
% 0.13/10.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.13/10.45
% 0.13/10.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/10.45 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.13/10.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/10.45 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.13/10.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.13/10.45
% 0.13/10.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/10.45 % User time : 0.049 s
% 0.13/10.45 % System time : 0.019 s
% 0.13/10.45 % Total time : 0.068 s
% 0.13/10.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/10.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------