%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV678-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 02:59:44 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.30s 0.79s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.30s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 7 unt; 3 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 31 ( 14 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat)
| c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),t_a) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_nz_0,axiom,
( v_a != c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_nz_0) ).
cnf(cls_True_0,axiom,
c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_True_0) ).
cnf(cls_power__diff_0,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X3,tc_nat)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1)
| X2 = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(X1)
| c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X3,X4,tc_nat),X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X3,X1),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X4,X1),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_power__diff_0) ).
cnf(tfree_tcs,negated_conjecture,
class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',tfree_tcs) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat)
| c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),t_a) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( v_a != c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_nz_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat)
| c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),t_a) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),
cls_True_0 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X3,tc_nat)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1)
| X2 = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(X1)
| c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X3,X4,tc_nat),X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X3,X1),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X4,X1),X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_power__diff_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( v_a != c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a),
tfree_tcs ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),t_a),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(X4,X3,tc_nat)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1)
| X2 = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(X1)
| c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X3,X4,tc_nat),X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X3,X1),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X4,X1),X1) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a) != v_a,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_11]),c_0_8])]),c_0_14]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SWV678-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.46 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.21/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.21/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.21/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.21/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.21/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.21/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.21/0.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:14:12 UTC 2026
% 0.21/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.53 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.30/0.79 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.30/0.79 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.30/0.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % new_bool_3 with pid 1971462 completed with status 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.30/0.79 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.30/0.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.30/0.79 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.30/0.79 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.30/0.79 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1971465 completed with status 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.30/0.79 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.30/0.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.30/0.79 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.30/0.79 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.30/0.79 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.30/0.79 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.79 % Preprocessing time : 0.005 s
% 0.30/0.79
% 0.30/0.79 % Proof found!
% 0.30/0.79 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.30/0.79 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.30/0.79 % Parsed axioms : 687
% 0.30/0.79 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 275
% 0.30/0.79 % Initial clauses : 412
% 0.30/0.79 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Initial clauses in saturation : 412
% 0.30/0.79 % Processed clauses : 3421
% 0.30/0.79 % ...of these trivial : 252
% 0.30/0.79 % ...subsumed : 2464
% 0.30/0.79 % ...remaining for further processing : 705
% 0.30/0.79 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 71
% 0.30/0.79 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.30/0.79 % Backward-rewritten : 26
% 0.30/0.79 % Generated clauses : 13405
% 0.30/0.79 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 10585
% 0.30/0.79 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.30/0.79 % Paramodulations : 13321
% 0.30/0.79 % Factorizations : 8
% 0.30/0.79 % NegExts : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Equation resolutions : 76
% 0.30/0.79 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Total rewrite steps : 7461
% 0.30/0.79 % ...of those cached : 6502
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.30/0.79 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.30/0.79 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.30/0.79 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.30/0.79 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.30/0.79 % Current number of processed clauses : 676
% 0.30/0.79 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 148
% 0.30/0.79 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 5
% 0.30/0.79 % Negative unit clauses : 110
% 0.30/0.79 % Non-unit-clauses : 413
% 0.30/0.79 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7504
% 0.30/0.79 % ...number of literals in the above : 19406
% 0.30/0.79 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Current number of archived clauses : 29
% 0.30/0.79 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 21520
% 0.30/0.79 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14197
% 0.30/0.79 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 875
% 0.30/0.79 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3442
% 0.30/0.79 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % BW rewrite match attempts : 264
% 0.30/0.79 % BW rewrite match successes : 60
% 0.30/0.79 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.30/0.79 % Termbank termtop insertions : 177692
% 0.30/0.79 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1648
% 0.30/0.79
% 0.30/0.79 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.30/0.79 % User time : 0.186 s
% 0.30/0.79 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.30/0.79 % Total time : 0.194 s
% 0.30/0.79 % Maximum resident set size: 4592 pages
% 0.30/0.79
% 0.30/0.79 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.30/0.79 % User time : 0.215 s
% 0.30/0.79 % System time : 0.016 s
% 0.30/0.79 % Total time : 0.231 s
% 0.30/0.79 % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.30/0.79 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------