%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO046-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 12:27:00 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.17s 5.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 24 ( 13 unt; 4 nHn; 24 RR)
% Number of literals : 45 ( 5 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 4 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(t1,axiom,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t1) ).
cnf(b5,axiom,
( ~ between(X1,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X2,X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b5) ).
cnf(v_between_u_and_x,hypothesis,
between(u,v,x),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',v_between_u_and_x) ).
cnf(w_between_v_and_x,hypothesis,
between(v,w,x),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',w_between_v_and_x) ).
cnf(b6,axiom,
( ~ between(X2,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| X2 = X3
| between(X1,X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b6) ).
cnf(prove_w_between_u_and_x,negated_conjecture,
~ between(u,w,x),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_w_between_u_and_x) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[t1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X2,X3,X4) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[b5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
between(u,v,x),
v_between_u_and_x ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X2,X3,X4) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
between(x,v,u),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
between(v,w,x),
w_between_v_and_x ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ between(X2,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| X2 = X3
| between(X1,X3,X4) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[b6]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
( ~ between(x,X1,v)
| between(X1,v,u) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
between(x,w,v),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ between(u,w,x),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_w_between_u_and_x]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ between(X2,X3,X4)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| X2 = X3
| between(X1,X3,X4) ),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
between(w,v,u),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ between(u,w,x),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
( ~ between(X1,v,w)
| between(X1,w,x)
| w = v ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
between(u,v,w),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
w = v,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_22]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GEO046-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/5.37 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.13/5.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/5.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/5.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.13/5.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.13/5.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/5.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/5.37 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 08:38:45 UTC 2026
% 0.13/5.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/5.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/5.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/5.43 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
% 0.17/5.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/5.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/5.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 3404185 completed with status 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.17/5.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/5.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/5.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/5.47 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.17/5.47 % partial match(2): FGUSM-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.17/5.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3404190 completed with status 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.17/5.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/5.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.17/5.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/5.47 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.17/5.47 % partial match(2): FGUSM-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.17/5.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/5.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/5.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.17/5.47
% 0.17/5.47 % Proof found!
% 0.17/5.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.17/5.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/5.47 % Parsed axioms : 58
% 0.17/5.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 25
% 0.17/5.47 % Initial clauses : 33
% 0.17/5.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.17/5.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 32
% 0.17/5.47 % Processed clauses : 60
% 0.17/5.47 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % ...subsumed : 6
% 0.17/5.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 54
% 0.17/5.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.17/5.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Backward-rewritten : 21
% 0.17/5.47 % Generated clauses : 119
% 0.17/5.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 76
% 0.17/5.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Paramodulations : 118
% 0.17/5.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.17/5.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Total rewrite steps : 98
% 0.17/5.47 % ...of those cached : 76
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/5.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/5.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/5.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/5.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/5.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 32
% 0.17/5.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.17/5.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 24
% 0.17/5.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 42
% 0.17/5.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 161
% 0.17/5.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 21
% 0.17/5.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 270
% 0.17/5.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 246
% 0.17/5.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 6
% 0.17/5.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 11
% 0.17/5.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.17/5.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/5.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2149
% 0.17/5.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 188
% 0.17/5.47
% 0.17/5.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/5.47 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.17/5.47 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.17/5.47 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.17/5.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3676 pages
% 0.17/5.47
% 0.17/5.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/5.47 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.17/5.47 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.17/5.47 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.17/5.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.17/5.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------