%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : RNG023-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 02:05:32 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 11 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 11 ( 10 equ; 4 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 : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(prove_left_alternative,negated_conjecture,
associator(x,x,y) != additive_identity,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_left_alternative) ).
cnf(associator,axiom,
associator(X1,X2,X3) = add(multiply(multiply(X1,X2),X3),additive_inverse(multiply(X1,multiply(X2,X3)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/RNG003-0.ax',associator) ).
cnf(left_alternative,axiom,
multiply(multiply(X1,X1),X2) = multiply(X1,multiply(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/RNG003-0.ax',left_alternative) ).
cnf(right_additive_inverse,axiom,
add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)) = additive_identity,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/RNG003-0.ax',right_additive_inverse) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
associator(x,x,y) != additive_identity,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_left_alternative]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
associator(x,x,y) != additive_identity,
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
associator(X1,X2,X3) = add(multiply(multiply(X1,X2),X3),additive_inverse(multiply(X1,multiply(X2,X3)))),
associator ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
add(multiply(multiply(x,x),y),additive_inverse(multiply(x,multiply(x,y)))) != additive_identity,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
multiply(multiply(X1,X1),X2) = multiply(X1,multiply(X1,X2)),
left_alternative ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)) = additive_identity,
right_additive_inverse ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : RNG023-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:11:25 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.42 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
% 0.12/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 946372 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/0.44 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.44 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_060_C18_F1_PI_SE_CS_SP_CO_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting U----_043_B31_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 946378 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/0.44 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.44 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.44 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 16
% 0.12/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.12/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.12/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 0.12/0.44 % Processed clauses : 12
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 12
% 0.12/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.12/0.44 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 10
% 0.12/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.12/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.12/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.12/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.12/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 14
% 0.12/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 11
% 0.12/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 218
% 0.12/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.44 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3388 pages
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.12/0.44 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.12/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------