%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP415-1 : 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 : n009.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 12:39:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.88s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.88s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 17 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 16 ( 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 : 46 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X2,X1)),multiply(X2,inverse(X3)))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)))))) = X3,
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,
inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X2,X1)),multiply(X2,inverse(X3)))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)))))) = X3,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_3,plain,
inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X2,X1)),multiply(X2,X3))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)))))) = multiply(X4,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X5,X4)),multiply(X5,inverse(X3)))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X4),X4))))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X2,X1)),multiply(X2,inverse(inverse(X3))))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1))))) = X3,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X2,X1)),X3)),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)))))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X4,X2)),multiply(X4,inverse(inverse(X3))))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(inverse(multiply(X2,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,X2)),X3)),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2)))))))) = X3,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_5]),c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,X2)),multiply(X1,inverse(inverse(multiply(X2,inverse(X3))))))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2))) = X3,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
multiply(X1,inverse(inverse(multiply(X2,inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2)))))))) = inverse(inverse(multiply(X4,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,X2)),X4)),X3)),inverse(multiply(inverse(X4),X4))))))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
inverse(multiply(X1,inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X2,X3)),multiply(X2,inverse(inverse(multiply(X3,inverse(X4))))))),X1)),X4)),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)))))) = multiply(inverse(X3),X3),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_7]),c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,X2)),multiply(X1,X3))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2))) = multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(X4,X2)),multiply(X4,X3))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_3]),c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
multiply(inverse(multiply(X1,X2)),multiply(X1,inverse(inverse(multiply(X2,inverse(multiply(inverse(X3),inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2))))))))) = X3,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)),inverse(multiply(inverse(multiply(inverse(X2),X2)),inverse(multiply(inverse(inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1))),inverse(multiply(inverse(X1),X1)))))))) = multiply(inverse(X1),X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != multiply(inverse(b1),b1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,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_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != multiply(inverse(b1),b1),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
multiply(inverse(X1),X1) = multiply(inverse(X2),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP415-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n009.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 20:12:27 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.88/0.62 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.88/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.88/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % new_bool_1 with pid 4140306 completed with status 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.88/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.88/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.88/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.88/0.62 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.88/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % SubtermCWHack with pid 4140314 completed with status 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.88/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.88/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.88/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.88/0.62 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.88/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.88/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.88/0.62 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.88/0.62
% 0.88/0.62 % Proof found!
% 0.88/0.62 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.88/0.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.88/0.62 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.88/0.62 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Initial clauses : 2
% 0.88/0.62 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.88/0.62 % Processed clauses : 97
% 0.88/0.62 % ...of these trivial : 12
% 0.88/0.62 % ...subsumed : 60
% 0.88/0.62 % ...remaining for further processing : 25
% 0.88/0.62 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.88/0.62 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Generated clauses : 4016
% 0.88/0.62 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3511
% 0.88/0.62 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Paramodulations : 4015
% 0.88/0.62 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % NegExts : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Total rewrite steps : 654
% 0.88/0.62 % ...of those cached : 409
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.88/0.62 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.88/0.62 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.88/0.62 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.88/0.62 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.88/0.62 % Current number of processed clauses : 22
% 0.88/0.62 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.88/0.62 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 11
% 0.88/0.62 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3415
% 0.88/0.62 % ...number of literals in the above : 3415
% 0.88/0.62 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.88/0.62 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 87
% 0.88/0.62 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 424
% 0.88/0.62 % BW rewrite match attempts : 261
% 0.88/0.62 % BW rewrite match successes : 58
% 0.88/0.62 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.88/0.62 % Termbank termtop insertions : 282291
% 0.88/0.62 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.88/0.62
% 0.88/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.88/0.62 % User time : 0.170 s
% 0.88/0.62 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.88/0.62 % Total time : 0.178 s
% 0.88/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.88/0.62
% 0.88/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.88/0.62 % User time : 0.171 s
% 0.88/0.62 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.88/0.62 % Total time : 0.184 s
% 0.88/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.88/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------