%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : KLE086+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 12:59:18 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 0.57s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 29 ( 29 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 29 ( 28 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 5 ( 5 ~; 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 : 6 ( 6 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 23 ( 0 sgn 14 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goals,conjecture,
domain(zero) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).
fof(domain3,axiom,
! [X4] : addition(antidomain(antidomain(X4)),antidomain(X4)) = one,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+4.ax',domain3) ).
fof(additive_commutativity,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : addition(X1,X2) = addition(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_commutativity) ).
fof(multiplicative_right_identity,axiom,
! [X1] : multiplication(X1,one) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',multiplicative_right_identity) ).
fof(domain1,axiom,
! [X4] : multiplication(antidomain(X4),X4) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+4.ax',domain1) ).
fof(additive_identity,axiom,
! [X1] : addition(X1,zero) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_identity) ).
fof(domain4,axiom,
! [X4] : domain(X4) = antidomain(antidomain(X4)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+4.ax',domain4) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
domain(zero) != zero,
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
domain(zero) != zero,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X26] : addition(antidomain(antidomain(X26)),antidomain(X26)) = one,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain3]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X12,X13] : addition(X12,X13) = addition(X13,X12),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[additive_commutativity]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X33] : multiplication(X33,one) = X33,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[multiplicative_right_identity]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X9] : multiplication(antidomain(X9),X9) = zero,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain1]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X6] : addition(X6,zero) = X6,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[additive_identity]) ).
fof(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
domain(zero) != zero,
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X11] : domain(X11) = antidomain(antidomain(X11)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain4]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
addition(antidomain(antidomain(X1)),antidomain(X1)) = one,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
addition(X1,X2) = addition(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
multiplication(X1,one) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
multiplication(antidomain(X1),X1) = zero,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
addition(X1,zero) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
domain(zero) != zero,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
domain(X1) = antidomain(antidomain(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
addition(antidomain(X1),antidomain(antidomain(X1))) = one,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
antidomain(one) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
addition(zero,X1) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
antidomain(antidomain(zero)) != zero,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
antidomain(zero) = one,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]),c_0_24])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : KLE086+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.39 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.39 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.39 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.39 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.14/0.39 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.14/0.39 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.39 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.39 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:42:42 UTC 2026
% 0.14/0.40 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.40 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.49 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
% 0.25/0.57 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % sh5l with pid 211055 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.57 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.57 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % SubtermCWHack with pid 211061 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.57 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.57 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.57 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.57 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.57 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.57 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/0.57 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.57 % Parsed axioms : 21
% 0.25/0.57 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.25/0.57 % Initial clauses : 20
% 0.25/0.57 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Initial clauses in saturation : 20
% 0.25/0.57 % Processed clauses : 19
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.25/0.57 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % ...remaining for further processing : 18
% 0.25/0.57 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Generated clauses : 14
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 7
% 0.25/0.57 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Paramodulations : 14
% 0.25/0.57 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Total rewrite steps : 13
% 0.25/0.57 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of processed clauses : 16
% 0.25/0.57 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 15
% 0.25/0.57 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.25/0.57 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 8
% 0.25/0.57 % ...number of literals in the above : 8
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.25/0.57 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.25/0.57 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.25/0.57 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.57 % Termbank termtop insertions : 822
% 0.25/0.57 % Search garbage collected termcells : 6
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.57 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.25/0.57 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 3652 pages
% 0.25/0.57
% 0.25/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.57 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.25/0.57 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.25/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.57 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------