%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO048-3 : 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 : n016.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 12:27:01 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.16s 5.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 19 RR)
% Number of literals : 28 ( 0 equ; 13 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 6 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(t1,axiom,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t1) ).
cnf(prove_conclusion2,negated_conjecture,
~ between(v,inner_pasch(v1,inner_pasch(u,x,u1,v1,w),u,v,w),v1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_conclusion2) ).
cnf(inner_pasch2,axiom,
( ~ between(X4,X5,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X5,inner_pasch(X1,X2,X3,X5,X4),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO002-0.ax',inner_pasch2) ).
cnf(v_between_u_and_w,hypothesis,
between(u,v,w),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',v_between_u_and_w) ).
cnf(v1_between_u1_and_w,hypothesis,
between(u1,v1,w),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',v1_between_u1_and_w) ).
cnf(x_between_u_and_u1,hypothesis,
between(u,x,u1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',x_between_u_and_u1) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[t1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ between(v,inner_pasch(v1,inner_pasch(u,x,u1,v1,w),u,v,w),v1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_conclusion2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ between(X4,X5,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X5,inner_pasch(X1,X2,X3,X5,X4),X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inner_pasch2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X3,X2,X1) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
between(u,v,w),
v_between_u_and_w ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ between(v,inner_pasch(v1,inner_pasch(u,x,u1,v1,w),u,v,w),v1),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ between(X4,X5,X3)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| between(X5,inner_pasch(X1,X2,X3,X5,X4),X1) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
between(w,v,u),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
between(u1,v1,w),
v1_between_u1_and_w ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ between(v1,inner_pasch(u,x,u1,v1,w),u),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
between(w,v1,u1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
between(u,x,u1),
x_between_u_and_u1 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_12]),c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GEO048-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/5.59 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.12/5.59 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/5.59 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/5.59 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/5.59 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/5.59 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/5.59 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/5.59 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 08:44:41 UTC 2026
% 0.12/5.59 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/5.59 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/5.64 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/5.64 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
% 0.16/5.67 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/5.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % new_bool_3 with pid 4108908 completed with status 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.16/5.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/5.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/5.67 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMS33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.67 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % SubtermCWHack with pid 4108911 completed with status 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/5.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/5.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/5.67 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMS33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.67 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/5.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.67 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.16/5.67
% 0.16/5.67 % Proof found!
% 0.16/5.67 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.16/5.67 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/5.67 % Parsed axioms : 68
% 0.16/5.67 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 46
% 0.16/5.67 % Initial clauses : 22
% 0.16/5.67 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.16/5.67 % Initial clauses in saturation : 21
% 0.16/5.67 % Processed clauses : 148
% 0.16/5.67 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % ...subsumed : 51
% 0.16/5.67 % ...remaining for further processing : 97
% 0.16/5.67 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.16/5.67 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Generated clauses : 424
% 0.16/5.67 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 366
% 0.16/5.67 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Paramodulations : 423
% 0.16/5.67 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.16/5.67 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Total rewrite steps : 61
% 0.16/5.67 % ...of those cached : 38
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.67 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.67 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.67 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.67 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.67 % Current number of processed clauses : 96
% 0.16/5.67 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.16/5.67 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.16/5.67 % Non-unit-clauses : 85
% 0.16/5.67 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 239
% 0.16/5.67 % ...number of literals in the above : 787
% 0.16/5.67 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1077
% 0.16/5.67 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1050
% 0.16/5.67 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 51
% 0.16/5.67 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.16/5.67 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.16/5.67 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/5.67 % Termbank termtop insertions : 5047
% 0.16/5.67 % Search garbage collected termcells : 242
% 0.16/5.67
% 0.16/5.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/5.67 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.16/5.67 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/5.67 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.16/5.67 % Maximum resident set size: 3684 pages
% 0.16/5.67
% 0.16/5.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/5.67 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.16/5.67 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.16/5.67 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.16/5.67 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.16/5.67 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------