%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP481-1 : 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 : n013.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 12:39:54 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.16s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 17 equ; 5 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 : 23 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(identity,axiom,
identity = double_divide(X1,inverse(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',identity) ).
cnf(inverse,axiom,
inverse(X1) = double_divide(X1,identity),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',inverse) ).
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,identity)),double_divide(double_divide(X3,double_divide(X4,double_divide(X4,identity))),double_divide(X1,identity))),X2) = X3,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
cnf(prove_these_axioms_1,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != identity,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_these_axioms_1) ).
cnf(multiply,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = double_divide(double_divide(X2,X1),identity),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',multiply) ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
identity = double_divide(X1,inverse(X1)),
identity ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
inverse(X1) = double_divide(X1,identity),
inverse ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,identity)),double_divide(double_divide(X3,double_divide(X4,double_divide(X4,identity))),double_divide(X1,identity))),X2) = X3,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
double_divide(X1,double_divide(X1,identity)) = identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != identity,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,identity)),double_divide(double_divide(X3,identity),double_divide(X1,identity))),X2) = X3,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
multiply(inverse(a1),a1) != identity,
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(X1,identity),double_divide(X2,identity)),identity),X2) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
multiply(double_divide(a1,identity),a1) != identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = double_divide(double_divide(X2,X1),identity),
multiply ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(identity,identity),double_divide(X1,identity)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
double_divide(identity,identity) != identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GRP481-1 : 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 : n013.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 20:13:53 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.44 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
% 0.16/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % new_bool_1 with pid 3317995 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.16/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.47 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3318001 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.47 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/0.47
% 0.16/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.16/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.16/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.16/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.16/0.47 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.16/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.16/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.16/0.47 % Generated clauses : 25
% 0.16/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 21
% 0.16/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Paramodulations : 25
% 0.16/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.16/0.47 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 7
% 0.16/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.16/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.16/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 17
% 0.16/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 17
% 0.16/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.16/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.16/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.16/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 460
% 0.16/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.16/0.47
% 0.16/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.47 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/0.47 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.16/0.47
% 0.16/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.47 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.16/0.47 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.16/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------