%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP699-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.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 12:44:57 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.55s 0.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.55s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 18 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 17 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 30 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c08,axiom,
mult(mult(X1,X2),mult(X2,mult(X3,X2))) = mult(mult(X1,mult(X2,mult(X2,X3))),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c08) ).
cnf(c06,axiom,
mult(unit,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c06) ).
cnf(c01,axiom,
mult(X1,ld(X1,X2)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c01) ).
cnf(c02,axiom,
ld(X1,mult(X1,X2)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c02) ).
cnf(goals,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(a,b),c) != mult(mult(a,c),ld(c,mult(b,c))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
mult(mult(X1,X2),mult(X2,mult(X3,X2))) = mult(mult(X1,mult(X2,mult(X2,X3))),X2),
c08 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
mult(unit,X1) = X1,
c06 ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
mult(mult(X1,mult(X1,X2)),X1) = mult(X1,mult(X1,mult(X2,X1))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
mult(X1,ld(X1,X2)) = X2,
c01 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
ld(X1,mult(X1,X2)) = X2,
c02 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
mult(X1,mult(X1,mult(ld(X1,X2),X1))) = mult(mult(X1,X2),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
ld(X1,mult(mult(X1,X2),X1)) = mult(X1,mult(ld(X1,X2),X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(a,b),c) != mult(mult(a,c),ld(c,mult(b,c))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[goals]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
mult(mult(X1,X2),mult(X2,mult(ld(X2,X3),X2))) = mult(mult(X1,mult(X2,X3)),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
mult(X1,mult(ld(X1,ld(X1,X2)),X1)) = ld(X1,mult(X2,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
mult(mult(a,b),c) != mult(mult(a,c),ld(c,mult(b,c))),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
mult(mult(X1,X2),ld(X2,mult(X3,X2))) = mult(mult(X1,X3),X2),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GRP699-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:34:13 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.41 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
% 0.55/0.51 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.55/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.55/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 13982 completed with status 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.55/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.55/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.55/0.51 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.55/0.51 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.55/0.51 % Scheduled 10 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 13987 completed with status 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.55/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.55/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.55/0.51 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.55/0.51 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.55/0.51 % Scheduled 10 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.51 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.55/0.51
% 0.55/0.51 % Proof found!
% 0.55/0.51 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.55/0.51 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.55/0.51 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.55/0.51 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.55/0.51 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.55/0.51 % Processed clauses : 118
% 0.55/0.51 % ...of these trivial : 28
% 0.55/0.51 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % ...remaining for further processing : 90
% 0.55/0.51 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Backward-rewritten : 16
% 0.55/0.51 % Generated clauses : 3746
% 0.55/0.51 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2867
% 0.55/0.51 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Paramodulations : 3746
% 0.55/0.51 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % NegExts : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Total rewrite steps : 8538
% 0.55/0.51 % ...of those cached : 7899
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.51 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.51 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.51 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.51 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.51 % Current number of processed clauses : 74
% 0.55/0.51 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 74
% 0.55/0.51 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2740
% 0.55/0.51 % ...number of literals in the above : 2740
% 0.55/0.51 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Current number of archived clauses : 16
% 0.55/0.51 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % BW rewrite match attempts : 157
% 0.55/0.51 % BW rewrite match successes : 11
% 0.55/0.51 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.55/0.51 % Termbank termtop insertions : 79886
% 0.55/0.51 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.55/0.51
% 0.55/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.55/0.51 % User time : 0.075 s
% 0.55/0.51 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.55/0.51 % Total time : 0.085 s
% 0.55/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 3380 pages
% 0.55/0.51
% 0.55/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.55/0.51 % User time : 0.352 s
% 0.55/0.51 % System time : 0.038 s
% 0.55/0.51 % Total time : 0.390 s
% 0.55/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.55/0.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------