%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP574-1 : 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 : 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 12:40:17 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 5.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 12
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 25 ( 25 unt; 0 nHn; 7 RR)
% Number of literals : 25 ( 24 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 : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(identity,axiom,
identity = double_divide(X1,inverse(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',identity) ).
cnf(inverse,axiom,
inverse(X1) = double_divide(X1,identity),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',inverse) ).
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
double_divide(double_divide(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,double_divide(X3,X1)),double_divide(X3,identity))),double_divide(identity,identity)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
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) = double_divide(double_divide(X2,X1),identity),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/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(X3,X1)),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(identity,double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,identity))),double_divide(identity,identity)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(identity,identity),double_divide(identity,identity)) = identity,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
double_divide(identity,identity) = identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_10]),c_0_8]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(identity,double_divide(identity,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(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,double_divide(X3,X1)),double_divide(X3,identity))),identity) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(identity,double_divide(identity,double_divide(X1,identity))),X1) = identity,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(X1,double_divide(double_divide(X2,identity),X1)),identity) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
multiply(identity,a2) != a2,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(identity,double_divide(double_divide(X1,X2),X2)),identity) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_13]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(X1,double_divide(identity,X1)),identity) = identity,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
multiply(identity,a2) != a2,
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_20,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = double_divide(double_divide(X2,X1),identity),
multiply ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
double_divide(X1,double_divide(identity,X1)) = identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_8]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
double_divide(double_divide(a2,identity),identity) != a2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(X1,identity),identity) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_21]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP574-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/5.39 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.11/5.39 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/5.39 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/5.39 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/5.39 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/5.39 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/5.39 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/5.39 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:18:50 UTC 2026
% 0.11/5.39 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/5.39 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/5.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/5.43 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
% 0.15/5.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/5.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % sh5l with pid 2495267 completed with status 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.15/5.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.15/5.45 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/5.45 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/5.45 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2495273 completed with status 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/5.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.15/5.45 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/5.45 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/5.45 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/5.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/5.45
% 0.15/5.45 % Proof found!
% 0.15/5.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/5.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/5.45 % Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.15/5.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.15/5.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.15/5.45 % Processed clauses : 19
% 0.15/5.45 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.15/5.45 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.15/5.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.15/5.45 % Generated clauses : 94
% 0.15/5.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 58
% 0.15/5.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Paramodulations : 94
% 0.15/5.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Total rewrite steps : 79
% 0.15/5.45 % ...of those cached : 62
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.15/5.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.15/5.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 35
% 0.15/5.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 35
% 0.15/5.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.15/5.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 15
% 0.15/5.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.15/5.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/5.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1172
% 0.15/5.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.15/5.45
% 0.15/5.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/5.45 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/5.45 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/5.45 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/5.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3376 pages
% 0.15/5.45
% 0.15/5.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/5.45 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/5.45 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/5.45 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/5.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/5.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------