%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : KLE075+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 : n017.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 12:58:47 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.16s 0.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 13 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 13 ( 12 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 4 ( 4 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 0 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goals,conjecture,
! [X4] : domain(multiplication(one,domain(X4))) = domain(X4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).
fof(multiplicative_left_identity,axiom,
! [X1] : multiplication(one,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',multiplicative_left_identity) ).
fof(domain2,axiom,
! [X4,X5] : domain(multiplication(X4,X5)) = domain(multiplication(X4,domain(X5))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+5.ax',domain2) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4] : domain(multiplication(one,domain(X4))) = domain(X4),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
domain(multiplication(one,domain(esk1_0))) != domain(esk1_0),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X23] : multiplication(one,X23) = X23,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[multiplicative_left_identity]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X8,X9] : domain(multiplication(X8,X9)) = domain(multiplication(X8,domain(X9))),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
domain(multiplication(one,domain(esk1_0))) != domain(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
multiplication(one,X1) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
domain(multiplication(X1,X2)) = domain(multiplication(X1,domain(X2))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
domain(domain(esk1_0)) != domain(esk1_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
domain(domain(X1)) = domain(X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : KLE075+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.38 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:37:12 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.39 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.39 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.46 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.46 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
% 0.16/0.51 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % new_bool_1 with pid 786908 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.16/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.51 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.51 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.51 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % SubtermCWHack with pid 786910 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.51 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.51 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.51 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.51 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/0.51
% 0.16/0.51 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.51 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.16/0.51 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.51 % Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.16/0.51 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.16/0.51 % Initial clauses : 17
% 0.16/0.51 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Initial clauses in saturation : 17
% 0.16/0.51 % Processed clauses : 19
% 0.16/0.51 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.16/0.51 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.16/0.51 % ...remaining for further processing : 16
% 0.16/0.51 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.16/0.51 % Generated clauses : 25
% 0.16/0.51 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 10
% 0.16/0.51 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Paramodulations : 25
% 0.16/0.51 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Total rewrite steps : 25
% 0.16/0.51 % ...of those cached : 5
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.51 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.51 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.51 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.51 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.51 % Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.16/0.51 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.16/0.51 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.16/0.51 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 8
% 0.16/0.51 % ...number of literals in the above : 8
% 0.16/0.51 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.16/0.51 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % BW rewrite match attempts : 11
% 0.16/0.51 % BW rewrite match successes : 10
% 0.16/0.51 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.51 % Termbank termtop insertions : 794
% 0.16/0.51 % Search garbage collected termcells : 17
% 0.16/0.51
% 0.16/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.51 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.16/0.51 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.51 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.16/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 3596 pages
% 0.16/0.51
% 0.16/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.51 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.16/0.51 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.16/0.51 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.16/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/0.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------