%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP176-1 : 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 : n019.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 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 9 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 9 ( 8 equ; 4 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 : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(prove_p07,negated_conjecture,
multiply(c,multiply(least_upper_bound(a,b),d)) != least_upper_bound(multiply(c,multiply(a,d)),multiply(c,multiply(b,d))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_p07) ).
cnf(monotony_lub1,axiom,
multiply(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)) = least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',monotony_lub1) ).
cnf(monotony_lub2,axiom,
multiply(least_upper_bound(X1,X2),X3) = least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X3),multiply(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',monotony_lub2) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
multiply(c,multiply(least_upper_bound(a,b),d)) != least_upper_bound(multiply(c,multiply(a,d)),multiply(c,multiply(b,d))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_p07]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
multiply(c,multiply(least_upper_bound(a,b),d)) != least_upper_bound(multiply(c,multiply(a,d)),multiply(c,multiply(b,d))),
c_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
multiply(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)) = least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3)),
monotony_lub1 ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
multiply(c,least_upper_bound(multiply(a,d),multiply(b,d))) != multiply(c,multiply(least_upper_bound(a,b),d)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
multiply(least_upper_bound(X1,X2),X3) = least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X3),multiply(X2,X3)),
monotony_lub2 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP176-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.35 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:04:06 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.43 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
% 0.13/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 805721 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_060_C18_F1_PI_SE_CS_SP_CO_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting U----_043_B31_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 805727 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 16
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.13/0.45 % Processed clauses : 15
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 15
% 0.13/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.13/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.13/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 10
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 244
% 0.13/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------