%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP615-1 : 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 : n010.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 12:40:22 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.29s 0.72s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.29s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 23
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 35 ( 35 unt; 0 nHn; 8 RR)
% Number of literals : 35 ( 34 equ; 7 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 11 ( 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 : 64 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(single_axiom,axiom,
double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(X1,inverse(X2))),X3)),double_divide(X1,X3)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',single_axiom) ).
cnf(prove_these_axioms_3,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(a3,b3),c3) != multiply(a3,multiply(b3,c3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_these_axioms_3) ).
cnf(multiply,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = inverse(double_divide(X2,X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',multiply) ).
cnf(c_0_3,axiom,
double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(X1,inverse(X2))),X3)),double_divide(X1,X3)) = X2,
single_axiom ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(X1,inverse(X2))),X3)),inverse(X4))),double_divide(X1,X3))),X2) = X4,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(X1),inverse(X2))),X1) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_4]),c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(inverse(X2),X2)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(inverse(double_divide(X2,inverse(X1))),double_divide(X2,inverse(X3)))) = X3,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(X1),X1)),inverse(X2)) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(inverse(X1),X2)) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
double_divide(inverse(double_divide(inverse(X1),X1)),X2) = inverse(X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
inverse(inverse(X1)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
double_divide(X1,double_divide(inverse(X2),X2)) = inverse(X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(X2,inverse(X1))) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_12]),c_0_11]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
double_divide(X1,double_divide(X1,X2)) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,X1)) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
double_divide(X1,X2) = double_divide(X2,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
double_divide(X1,inverse(double_divide(inverse(X1),inverse(X2)))) = X2,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
inverse(double_divide(inverse(X1),inverse(X2))) = double_divide(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),inverse(X2)) = inverse(double_divide(X1,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
inverse(double_divide(X1,inverse(X2))) = double_divide(inverse(X1),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(a3,b3),c3) != multiply(a3,multiply(b3,c3)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_these_axioms_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(double_divide(inverse(X2),X1),double_divide(X2,X3))) = inverse(X3),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_11]),c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
multiply(multiply(a3,b3),c3) != multiply(a3,multiply(b3,c3)),
c_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_24,axiom,
multiply(X1,X2) = inverse(double_divide(X2,X1)),
multiply ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(inverse(X1),X2),double_divide(X1,X3)) = inverse(double_divide(X2,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_22]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
inverse(double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))) != inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(c3,b3)),a3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_24]),c_0_24]),c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
inverse(double_divide(X1,double_divide(X2,X3))) = double_divide(double_divide(inverse(X2),X1),X3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
inverse(double_divide(a3,inverse(double_divide(c3,b3)))) != inverse(double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
double_divide(double_divide(X1,X2),inverse(X3)) = double_divide(inverse(X2),double_divide(X1,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_19]),c_0_20]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
double_divide(inverse(a3),double_divide(c3,b3)) != double_divide(inverse(c3),double_divide(b3,a3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_20]),c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(X2,X3)) = double_divide(inverse(X3),double_divide(X2,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
double_divide(inverse(b3),double_divide(c3,a3)) != double_divide(inverse(c3),double_divide(b3,a3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
double_divide(inverse(X1),double_divide(X2,X3)) = double_divide(inverse(X2),double_divide(X1,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_16]),c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GRP615-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.48 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.48 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.48 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.48 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.48 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.48 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.48 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.48 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:18:41 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.49 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.49 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.58 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.58 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
% 0.29/0.72 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.29/0.72 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.72 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3431323 completed with status 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.29/0.72 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.72 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.29/0.72 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.29/0.72 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.29/0.72 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3431330 completed with status 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Result found by U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.29/0.72 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/0.72 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.29/0.72 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.29/0.72 % Search class: FUUPF-FFSF21-DFFFFFNN
% 0.29/0.72 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Starting U----_116XG_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.29/0.72 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.29/0.72 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.29/0.72
% 0.29/0.72 % Proof found!
% 0.29/0.72 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.29/0.72 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.29/0.72 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.29/0.72 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Initial clauses : 3
% 0.29/0.72 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.29/0.72 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.29/0.72 % Processed clauses : 660
% 0.29/0.72 % ...of these trivial : 157
% 0.29/0.72 % ...subsumed : 415
% 0.29/0.72 % ...remaining for further processing : 88
% 0.29/0.72 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Backward-rewritten : 46
% 0.29/0.72 % Generated clauses : 5115
% 0.29/0.72 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3842
% 0.29/0.72 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Paramodulations : 5115
% 0.29/0.72 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % NegExts : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Total rewrite steps : 11909
% 0.29/0.72 % ...of those cached : 9237
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.72 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.72 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.72 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.72 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/0.72 % Current number of processed clauses : 40
% 0.29/0.72 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 32
% 0.29/0.72 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 8
% 0.29/0.72 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2718
% 0.29/0.72 % ...number of literals in the above : 2718
% 0.29/0.72 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Current number of archived clauses : 49
% 0.29/0.72 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 173
% 0.29/0.72 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % BW rewrite match attempts : 376
% 0.29/0.72 % BW rewrite match successes : 210
% 0.29/0.72 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.29/0.72 % Termbank termtop insertions : 62959
% 0.29/0.72 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.29/0.72
% 0.29/0.72 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/0.72 % User time : 0.102 s
% 0.29/0.72 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.29/0.72 % Total time : 0.117 s
% 0.29/0.72 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.29/0.72
% 0.29/0.72 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/0.72 % User time : 0.356 s
% 0.29/0.72 % System time : 0.041 s
% 0.29/0.72 % Total time : 0.397 s
% 0.29/0.72 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.29/0.72 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------