%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : KLE056+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 : n018.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 12:59:14 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.28s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.28s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 12 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 18 ( 17 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 6 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 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 : 11 ( 1 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goals,conjecture,
! [X4] :
( domain(X4) = zero
=> X4 = zero ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).
fof(domain1,axiom,
! [X4] : addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X4),X4)) = multiplication(domain(X4),X4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+5.ax',domain1) ).
fof(left_annihilation,axiom,
! [X1] : multiplication(zero,X1) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',left_annihilation) ).
fof(additive_identity,axiom,
! [X1] : addition(X1,zero) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_identity) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4] :
( domain(X4) = zero
=> X4 = zero ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X10] : addition(X10,multiplication(domain(X10),X10)) = multiplication(domain(X10),X10),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain1]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 != zero
& domain(esk1_0) = zero ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X9] : multiplication(zero,X9) = zero,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[left_annihilation]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X7] : addition(X7,zero) = X7,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[additive_identity]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
addition(X1,multiplication(domain(X1),X1)) = multiplication(domain(X1),X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
domain(esk1_0) = zero,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
multiplication(zero,X1) = zero,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
addition(X1,zero) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != zero,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_11]),c_0_13]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : KLE056+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.44 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.44 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:43:28 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.28/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.28/0.53 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
% 0.28/0.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.28/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % new_bool_3 with pid 356077 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.28/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.28/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.28/0.56 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.56 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 356081 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.28/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.28/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.28/0.56 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.56 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.28/0.56
% 0.28/0.56 % Proof found!
% 0.28/0.56 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.28/0.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.28/0.56 % Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.28/0.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 4
% 0.28/0.56 % Initial clauses : 15
% 0.28/0.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.28/0.56 % Processed clauses : 22
% 0.28/0.56 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.28/0.56 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.28/0.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.28/0.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Generated clauses : 56
% 0.28/0.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 29
% 0.28/0.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Paramodulations : 56
% 0.28/0.56 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Total rewrite steps : 59
% 0.28/0.56 % ...of those cached : 34
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 17
% 0.28/0.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 15
% 0.28/0.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.28/0.56 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.28/0.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 22
% 0.28/0.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 22
% 0.28/0.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.28/0.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.28/0.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.28/0.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1059
% 0.28/0.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 37
% 0.28/0.56
% 0.28/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.56 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.28/0.56 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.28/0.56 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.28/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.28/0.56
% 0.28/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.56 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.28/0.56 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.28/0.56 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.28/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.28/0.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------