%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO008-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n005.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 12:26:50 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 37 ( 18 unt; 5 nHn; 35 RR)
% Number of literals : 69 ( 0 equ; 32 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 55 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(t1,axiom,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t1) ).
cnf(b14,axiom,
( ~ between(X1,X4,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X4,X2,X3)
| between(X2,X4,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b14) ).
cnf(d_between_a_and_e,hypothesis,
between(a,d,e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d_between_a_and_e) ).
cnf(b8,axiom,
( ~ between(X2,X4,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X1,X4,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b8) ).
cnf(c_between_a_and_e,hypothesis,
between(a,c,e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c_between_a_and_e) ).
cnf(b9,axiom,
( ~ between(X1,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X1,X2,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b9) ).
cnf(b_between_c_and_d,hypothesis,
between(c,b,d),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_between_c_and_d) ).
cnf(prove_betweenness,negated_conjecture,
~ between(a,b,e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_betweenness) ).
cnf(t2,axiom,
between(X1,X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t2) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[t1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X4,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X4,X2,X3)
| between(X2,X4,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[b14]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
between(a,d,e),
d_between_a_and_e ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ between(X2,X4,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X1,X4,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[b8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
between(a,c,e),
c_between_a_and_e ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X1,X2,X4) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[b9]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X4,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X4,X2,X3)
| between(X2,X4,X3) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
between(e,d,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ between(X2,X4,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X1,X4,X3) ),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
between(e,c,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X1,X2,X4) ),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
between(c,b,d),
b_between_c_and_d ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
~ between(a,b,e),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_betweenness]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
( ~ between(e,X1,a)
| between(X1,d,a)
| between(d,X1,a) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
( ~ between(X1,e,a)
| between(X1,c,a) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,axiom,
between(X1,X1,X2),
t2 ).
cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
( ~ between(a,X1,d)
| between(a,X1,e) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
( ~ between(X1,c,d)
| between(X1,b,d) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
~ between(a,b,e),
c_0_22 ).
cnf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
between(d,b,c),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
( between(d,c,a)
| between(c,d,a) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_25])]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,hypothesis,
~ between(a,c,d),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]),c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,hypothesis,
( ~ between(a,X1,c)
| between(a,X1,e) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,hypothesis,
( ~ between(X1,d,c)
| between(X1,b,c) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,hypothesis,
between(c,d,a),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_30]),c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,hypothesis,
~ between(a,d,c),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33]),c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_34]),c_0_35]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : GEO008-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.46 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.46 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 08:14:48 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.46 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
% 0.24/0.62 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % new_bool_3 with pid 788180 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.62 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.62 % partial match(1): FGUNS-FFMS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % SubtermCWHack with pid 788188 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.62 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.62 % partial match(1): FGUNS-FFMS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.62
% 0.24/0.62 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.62 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/0.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.62 % Parsed axioms : 85
% 0.24/0.62 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 61
% 0.24/0.62 % Initial clauses : 24
% 0.24/0.62 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Initial clauses in saturation : 23
% 0.24/0.62 % Processed clauses : 302
% 0.24/0.62 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % ...subsumed : 126
% 0.24/0.62 % ...remaining for further processing : 176
% 0.24/0.62 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Backward-subsumed : 29
% 0.24/0.62 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Generated clauses : 828
% 0.24/0.62 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 714
% 0.24/0.62 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Paramodulations : 827
% 0.24/0.62 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Total rewrite steps : 108
% 0.24/0.62 % ...of those cached : 72
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of processed clauses : 145
% 0.24/0.62 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.24/0.62 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.24/0.62 % Non-unit-clauses : 129
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 336
% 0.24/0.62 % ...number of literals in the above : 1445
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of archived clauses : 30
% 0.24/0.62 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4563
% 0.24/0.62 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4367
% 0.24/0.62 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 120
% 0.24/0.62 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 159
% 0.24/0.62 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % BW rewrite match attempts : 10
% 0.24/0.62 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Termbank termtop insertions : 10828
% 0.24/0.62 % Search garbage collected termcells : 335
% 0.24/0.62
% 0.24/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.62 % User time : 0.031 s
% 0.24/0.62 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Total time : 0.037 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 3700 pages
% 0.24/0.62
% 0.24/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.62 % User time : 0.037 s
% 0.24/0.62 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Total time : 0.048 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------