%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP409-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 12:39:34 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.17s 0.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 14 ( 14 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 14 ( 13 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 36 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
multiply(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(X2,X3)))),multiply(X1,inverse(X3))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3))) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
cnf(prove_these_axioms_1,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != multiply(inverse(b1),b1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_these_axioms_1) ).
cnf(c_0_2,axiom,
multiply(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(X2,X3)))),multiply(X1,inverse(X3))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3))) = X2,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_3,plain,
multiply(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(X2))),multiply(X1,inverse(inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3))))),inverse(multiply(inverse(inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3))))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(X4,inverse(multiply(X2,X3)))),multiply(X4,inverse(X3))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(X2,X3)))),multiply(X1,inverse(X3))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(X4,inverse(multiply(X2,X3)))),multiply(X4,inverse(X3))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(multiply(X2,inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3))),X3)))),multiply(X1,inverse(X3))) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(X2))),multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(X3,inverse(X4))))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(X5,inverse(X2))),multiply(X5,inverse(multiply(X3,inverse(X4))))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(X2))),multiply(X1,inverse(X3))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(X4,inverse(X2))),multiply(X4,inverse(X3))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(X2))),multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),X3)))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(multiply(inverse(multiply(X4,inverse(multiply(X5,X3)))),multiply(X4,inverse(X3))),inverse(X2))),X5),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != multiply(inverse(b1),b1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2)))),multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2)))) = multiply(inverse(X3),X3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != multiply(inverse(b1),b1),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1) = multiply(inverse(X2),X2),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_10]),c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP409-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.58 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.58 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.58 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.58 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.58 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.58 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.58 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.58 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:12:55 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.58 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.58 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.63 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.63 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
% 0.17/0.67 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % new_bool_3 with pid 3416042 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.17/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.67 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.67 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3416047 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.17/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.67 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.67 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.67 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.17/0.67
% 0.17/0.67 % Proof found!
% 0.17/0.67 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.17/0.67 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.67 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.17/0.67 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Initial clauses : 2
% 0.17/0.67 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.17/0.67 % Processed clauses : 39
% 0.17/0.67 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.17/0.67 % ...subsumed : 17
% 0.17/0.67 % ...remaining for further processing : 19
% 0.17/0.67 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.17/0.67 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Generated clauses : 1280
% 0.17/0.67 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1055
% 0.17/0.67 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Paramodulations : 1279
% 0.17/0.67 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Total rewrite steps : 102
% 0.17/0.67 % ...of those cached : 55
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.67 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.67 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.67 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.67 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.67 % Current number of processed clauses : 15
% 0.17/0.67 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.17/0.67 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.17/0.67 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 998
% 0.17/0.67 % ...number of literals in the above : 998
% 0.17/0.67 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.17/0.67 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 57
% 0.17/0.67 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 215
% 0.17/0.67 % BW rewrite match attempts : 184
% 0.17/0.67 % BW rewrite match successes : 35
% 0.17/0.67 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/0.67 % Termbank termtop insertions : 53151
% 0.17/0.67 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.17/0.67
% 0.17/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.67 % User time : 0.023 s
% 0.17/0.67 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.17/0.67 % Total time : 0.028 s
% 0.17/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.17/0.67
% 0.17/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.67 % User time : 0.023 s
% 0.17/0.67 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.17/0.67 % Total time : 0.034 s
% 0.17/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.17/0.67 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------