%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP467-1 : 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 : n011.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 12:43:52 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.04s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.04s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 17 ( 17 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 17 ( 16 equ; 4 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 41 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
divide(divide(X1,X1),divide(X2,divide(divide(X3,divide(X4,X2)),inverse(X4)))) = X3,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
cnf(multiply,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = divide(X1,inverse(X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',multiply) ).
cnf(prove_these_axioms_2,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(inverse(b2),b2),a2) != a2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_these_axioms_2) ).
cnf(c_0_3,axiom,
divide(divide(X1,X1),divide(X2,divide(divide(X3,divide(X4,X2)),inverse(X4)))) = X3,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = divide(X1,inverse(X2)),
multiply ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
divide(divide(X1,X1),divide(X2,multiply(divide(X3,divide(X4,X2)),X4))) = X3,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
divide(divide(X1,X1),divide(multiply(divide(X2,divide(X3,X4)),X3),multiply(X2,X4))) = divide(X5,X5),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
divide(X1,X1) = divide(X2,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(inverse(b2),b2),a2) != a2,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
divide(divide(X1,X1),divide(X2,multiply(divide(X3,X3),X4))) = divide(X4,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(inverse(b2),b2),a2) != a2,
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
divide(X1,X1) = multiply(inverse(X2),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
divide(divide(X1,X1),divide(divide(X2,multiply(divide(X3,divide(X4,X2)),X4)),multiply(divide(X5,X3),divide(X6,X6)))) = X5,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
divide(X1,multiply(divide(X2,X2),X1)) = divide(X3,X3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
multiply(divide(X1,X1),a2) != a2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
multiply(divide(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_9]),c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP467-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.38 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:14:10 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.04/0.42 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
% 0.04/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.04/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % new_bool_3 with pid 78728 completed with status 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.04/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.04/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.04/0.45 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 78733 completed with status 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.04/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.04/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.04/0.45 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.04/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.04/0.45
% 0.04/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.04/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.04/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.04/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.04/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Initial clauses : 3
% 0.04/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.04/0.45 % Processed clauses : 41
% 0.04/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.04/0.45 % ...subsumed : 22
% 0.04/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 18
% 0.04/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.04/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.04/0.45 % Generated clauses : 400
% 0.04/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 350
% 0.04/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Paramodulations : 400
% 0.04/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 39
% 0.04/0.45 % ...of those cached : 16
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 15
% 0.04/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.04/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 5
% 0.04/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.04/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 311
% 0.04/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 311
% 0.04/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.04/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.04/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 98
% 0.04/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 102
% 0.04/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 22
% 0.04/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.04/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4309
% 0.04/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.04/0.45
% 0.04/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.04/0.45 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.04/0.45 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.04/0.45 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.04/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.04/0.45
% 0.04/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.04/0.45 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.04/0.45 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.04/0.45 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.04/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.04/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------