%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP461-1 : 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 : 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 12:43:51 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.17s 0.57s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 15 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 15 ( 14 equ; 4 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 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 : 19 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
divide(X1,divide(divide(divide(identity,X2),X3),divide(divide(divide(X1,X1),X1),X3))) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
cnf(identity,axiom,
identity = divide(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',identity) ).
cnf(prove_these_axioms_2,negated_conjecture,
multiply(identity,a2) != a2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_these_axioms_2) ).
cnf(multiply,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = divide(X1,divide(identity,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',multiply) ).
cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
divide(X1,divide(divide(divide(identity,X2),X3),divide(divide(divide(X1,X1),X1),X3))) = X2,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
identity = divide(X1,X1),
identity ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
divide(X1,divide(divide(divide(identity,X2),X3),divide(divide(identity,X1),X3))) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
multiply(identity,a2) != a2,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
divide(X1,identity) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
multiply(identity,a2) != a2,
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = divide(X1,divide(identity,X2)),
multiply ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
divide(X1,divide(divide(identity,X2),divide(identity,X1))) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
divide(identity,divide(identity,a2)) != a2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
divide(identity,divide(identity,X1)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP461-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.51 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.51 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.51 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.51 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.51 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.51 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.51 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.51 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:13:50 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.51 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.51 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.55 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.55 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
% 0.17/0.57 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % new_bool_1 with pid 2255878 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.17/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.57 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2255880 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.17/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/0.57 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.57 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.57 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.57 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.17/0.57
% 0.17/0.57 % Proof found!
% 0.17/0.57 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.17/0.57 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.57 % Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.17/0.57 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.17/0.57 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.17/0.57 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.17/0.57 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.17/0.57 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.17/0.57 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.17/0.57 % Generated clauses : 34
% 0.17/0.57 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 26
% 0.17/0.57 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Paramodulations : 34
% 0.17/0.57 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Total rewrite steps : 20
% 0.17/0.57 % ...of those cached : 13
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.57 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.57 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.57 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.57 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.57 % Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.17/0.57 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.17/0.57 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 22
% 0.17/0.57 % ...number of literals in the above : 22
% 0.17/0.57 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.17/0.57 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.17/0.57 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.17/0.57 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/0.57 % Termbank termtop insertions : 432
% 0.17/0.57 % Search garbage collected termcells : 5
% 0.17/0.57
% 0.17/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.57 % User time : 0.001 s
% 0.17/0.57 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.17/0.57 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.17/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.17/0.57
% 0.17/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.57 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.17/0.57 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.17/0.57 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.17/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.17/0.57 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------