↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : GRP572-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.7.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n003.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 12:40:16 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.43s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   14
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   29 (  29 unt;   0 nHn;   7 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   29 (  28 equ;   5 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    :    6 (   6 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   35 (   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(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,double_divide(X1,X3)),double_divide(X3,identity))),double_divide(identity,identity)) = X2,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).

cnf(prove_these_axioms_4,negated_conjecture,
    multiply(a,b) != multiply(b,a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_these_axioms_4) ).

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(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,double_divide(X1,X3)),double_divide(X3,identity))),double_divide(identity,identity)) = X2,
    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,plain,
    double_divide(double_divide(X1,identity),double_divide(identity,identity)) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    double_divide(double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,double_divide(identity,identity))),double_divide(identity,identity)) = double_divide(X1,identity),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    double_divide(identity,identity) = identity,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    double_divide(double_divide(X1,identity),identity) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    double_divide(double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,identity)),identity) = double_divide(X1,identity),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,identity)) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    double_divide(identity,X1) = double_divide(X1,identity),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,double_divide(X1,X3)),double_divide(X3,identity)))) = X2,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_11]),c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    double_divide(identity,double_divide(identity,X1)) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    multiply(a,b) != multiply(b,a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    double_divide(double_divide(X1,X2),X2) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_16]),c_0_17]),c_0_15]),c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,identity),X1))) = X2,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_8]),c_0_15]),c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    multiply(a,b) != multiply(b,a),
    c_0_18 ).

cnf(c_0_22,axiom,
    multiply(X1,X2) = double_divide(double_divide(X2,X1),identity),
    multiply ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,double_divide(double_divide(X1,identity),X2))) = identity,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    double_divide(double_divide(a,b),identity) != double_divide(double_divide(b,a),identity),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_22]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,X1)) = X2,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_23]),c_0_19]),c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    double_divide(identity,double_divide(a,b)) != double_divide(identity,double_divide(b,a)),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_15]),c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    double_divide(X1,X2) = double_divide(X2,X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : GRP572-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.7.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:18:30 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41  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
% 0.14/0.43  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % sh5l with pid 2494345 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.43  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.43  % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2494347 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.43  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.43  % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43  
% 0.14/0.43  % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.43  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.43  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43  % Parsed axioms                        : 5
% 0.14/0.43  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Initial clauses                      : 5
% 0.14/0.43  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.14/0.43  % Processed clauses                    : 41
% 0.14/0.43  % ...of these trivial                  : 6
% 0.14/0.43  % ...subsumed                          : 6
% 0.14/0.43  % ...remaining for further processing  : 29
% 0.14/0.43  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.14/0.43  % Backward-rewritten                   : 20
% 0.14/0.43  % Generated clauses                    : 297
% 0.14/0.43  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 133
% 0.14/0.43  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Paramodulations                      : 297
% 0.14/0.43  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Total rewrite steps                  : 382
% 0.14/0.43  % ...of those cached                   : 307
% 0.14/0.43  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of processed clauses  : 8
% 0.14/0.43  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 7
% 0.14/0.43  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.14/0.43  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 83
% 0.14/0.43  % ...number of literals in the above   : 83
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of archived clauses   : 21
% 0.14/0.43  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.14/0.43  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 97
% 0.14/0.43  % BW rewrite match successes           : 62
% 0.14/0.43  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3061
% 0.14/0.43  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2
% 0.14/0.43  
% 0.14/0.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.43  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.14/0.43  
% 0.14/0.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.14/0.43  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Total time               : 0.013 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.43  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------