↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : GRP409-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 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 12:43:34 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.52s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% 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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).

cnf(prove_these_axioms_1,negated_conjecture,
    multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != multiply(inverse(b1),b1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/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
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : GRP409-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:12:36 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.45  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.45  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
% 0.15/0.52  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.52  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.52  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2252648 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.52  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.52  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.52  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.52  % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.52  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2252654 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Result found by U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/0.52  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.52  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.52  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.52  % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.52  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Starting U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.52  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.52  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.52  
% 0.15/0.52  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.52  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.52  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.52  % Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.15/0.52  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Initial clauses                      : 2
% 0.15/0.52  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 2
% 0.15/0.52  % Processed clauses                    : 35
% 0.15/0.52  % ...of these trivial                  : 3
% 0.15/0.52  % ...subsumed                          : 14
% 0.15/0.52  % ...remaining for further processing  : 18
% 0.15/0.52  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.15/0.52  % Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 0.15/0.52  % Generated clauses                    : 748
% 0.15/0.52  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 600
% 0.15/0.52  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Paramodulations                      : 747
% 0.15/0.52  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Total rewrite steps                  : 105
% 0.15/0.52  % ...of those cached                   : 53
% 0.15/0.52  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.52  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.52  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.52  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.52  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.52  % Current number of processed clauses  : 10
% 0.15/0.52  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 6
% 0.15/0.52  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.15/0.52  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.52  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 547
% 0.15/0.52  % ...number of literals in the above   : 547
% 0.15/0.52  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Current number of archived clauses   : 8
% 0.15/0.52  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 35
% 0.15/0.52  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 132
% 0.15/0.52  % BW rewrite match successes           : 31
% 0.15/0.52  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.52  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 24329
% 0.15/0.52  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2
% 0.15/0.52  
% 0.15/0.52  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.52  % User time                : 0.018 s
% 0.15/0.52  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.52  % Total time               : 0.021 s
% 0.15/0.52  % Maximum resident set size: 3376 pages
% 0.15/0.52  
% 0.15/0.52  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.52  % User time                : 0.106 s
% 0.15/0.52  % System time              : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.52  % Total time               : 0.122 s
% 0.15/0.52  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.52  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------