%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP665-11 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n012.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 12:40:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.09s 0.55s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 6
% 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 : 4 ( 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 : 26 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(goal,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(x0,op_c),x1) != mult(x0,mult(op_c,x1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goal) ).
cnf(f09,axiom,
mult(op_c,X1) = mult(X1,op_c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f09) ).
cnf(f08,axiom,
mult(mult(X1,X2),X3) = mult(mult(X1,X3),ld(X3,mult(X2,X3))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f08) ).
cnf(f02,axiom,
ld(X1,mult(X1,X2)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f02) ).
cnf(f07,axiom,
mult(X1,mult(X2,X3)) = mult(rd(mult(X1,X2),X1),mult(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f07) ).
cnf(f04,axiom,
rd(mult(X1,X2),X2) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f04) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(x0,op_c),x1) != mult(x0,mult(op_c,x1)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[goal]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(x0,op_c),x1) != mult(x0,mult(op_c,x1)),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
mult(op_c,X1) = mult(X1,op_c),
f09 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
mult(mult(X1,X2),X3) = mult(mult(X1,X3),ld(X3,mult(X2,X3))),
f08 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
ld(X1,mult(X1,X2)) = X2,
f02 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
mult(X1,mult(X2,X3)) = mult(rd(mult(X1,X2),X1),mult(X1,X3)),
f07 ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
rd(mult(X1,X2),X2) = X1,
f04 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(x0,op_c),x1) != mult(x0,mult(x1,op_c)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
mult(mult(X1,op_c),X2) = mult(op_c,mult(X1,X2)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]),c_0_10]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
mult(X1,mult(op_c,X2)) = mult(op_c,mult(X1,X2)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_8]),c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01 % Problem : GRP665-11 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.1.0.
% 0.00/0.02 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.06/0.51 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.06/0.51 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.06/0.51 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.06/0.51 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.06/0.51 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.06/0.51 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.06/0.51 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.06/0.51 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:30:25 UTC 2026
% 0.06/0.51 % CPUTime :
% 0.06/0.51 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.53 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
% 0.09/0.55 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 814225 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.09/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.09/0.55 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.09/0.55 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.55 % Scheduled 10 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 814234 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Result found by U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.09/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.09/0.55 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.09/0.55 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.55 % Scheduled 10 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Starting U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.55 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.55 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.09/0.55
% 0.09/0.55 % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.55 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.09/0.55 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.55 % Parsed axioms : 10
% 0.09/0.55 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Initial clauses : 10
% 0.09/0.55 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Initial clauses in saturation : 10
% 0.09/0.55 % Processed clauses : 52
% 0.09/0.55 % ...of these trivial : 9
% 0.09/0.55 % ...subsumed : 6
% 0.09/0.55 % ...remaining for further processing : 37
% 0.09/0.55 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.09/0.55 % Generated clauses : 203
% 0.09/0.55 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 116
% 0.09/0.55 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Paramodulations : 203
% 0.09/0.55 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % NegExts : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Total rewrite steps : 143
% 0.09/0.55 % ...of those cached : 85
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.55 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.55 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.55 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.55 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.55 % Current number of processed clauses : 23
% 0.09/0.55 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 21
% 0.09/0.55 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.09/0.55 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 78
% 0.09/0.55 % ...number of literals in the above : 78
% 0.09/0.55 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Current number of archived clauses : 14
% 0.09/0.55 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % BW rewrite match attempts : 9
% 0.09/0.55 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.09/0.55 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.09/0.55 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1879
% 0.09/0.55 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.09/0.55
% 0.09/0.55 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.55 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.09/0.55 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.55 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.09/0.55 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.09/0.55
% 0.09/0.55 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.55 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.09/0.55 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.09/0.55 % Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.09/0.55 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.09/0.55 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------