%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO053-3 : 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 : n026.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 12:27:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.16s 5.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 16 unt; 0 nHn; 25 RR)
% Number of literals : 53 ( 6 equ; 27 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 61 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(d4_4,axiom,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| equidistant(X4,X3,X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d4_4) ).
cnf(d4_5,axiom,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| equidistant(X4,X3,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d4_5) ).
cnf(u_to_v_equals_u_to_w,hypothesis,
equidistant(u,v,u,w),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',u_to_v_equals_u_to_w) ).
cnf(d13,axiom,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X3,X4,X6)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X4,X5)
| ~ between(X4,X5,X6)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| equidistant(X2,X3,X5,X6) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d13) ).
cnf(reflexivity_for_equidistance,axiom,
equidistant(X1,X2,X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO002-0.ax',reflexivity_for_equidistance) ).
cnf(v_between_u_and_w,hypothesis,
between(u,v,w),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',v_between_u_and_w) ).
cnf(t3,axiom,
between(X1,X2,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t3) ).
cnf(identity_for_equidistance,axiom,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO002-0.ax',identity_for_equidistance) ).
cnf(prove_v_equals_w,negated_conjecture,
v != w,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_v_equals_w) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| equidistant(X4,X3,X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[d4_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| equidistant(X4,X3,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[d4_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| equidistant(X4,X3,X1,X2) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
equidistant(u,v,u,w),
u_to_v_equals_u_to_w ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X3,X4,X6)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X4,X5)
| ~ between(X4,X5,X6)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| equidistant(X2,X3,X5,X6) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[d13]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| equidistant(X4,X3,X2,X1) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
equidistant(w,u,u,v),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X3,X4,X6)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X4,X5)
| ~ between(X4,X5,X6)
| ~ between(X1,X2,X3)
| equidistant(X2,X3,X5,X6) ),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
equidistant(v,u,u,w),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
( ~ equidistant(v,X1,u,X2)
| ~ between(v,X1,u)
| ~ between(u,X2,w)
| equidistant(X1,u,X2,w) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,axiom,
equidistant(X1,X2,X2,X1),
reflexivity_for_equidistance ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
between(u,v,w),
v_between_u_and_w ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
between(X1,X2,X2),
t3 ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[identity_for_equidistance]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
equidistant(u,u,v,w),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]),c_0_21])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
v != w,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_v_equals_w]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_22 ).
cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
equidistant(w,v,u,u),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
v != w,
c_0_24 ).
cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]),c_0_27]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GEO053-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/5.40 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.12/5.40 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/5.40 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/5.40 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/5.40 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.04/5.40 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.04/5.40 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.04/5.40 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 09:08:42 UTC 2026
% 0.04/5.40 % CPUTime :
% 0.04/5.40 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/5.47 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.04/5.47 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
% 0.16/5.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/5.56 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % new_bool_1 with pid 3844099 completed with status 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.16/5.56 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/5.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/5.56 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.56 % partial match(2): FGUSM-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.56 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3844106 completed with status 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/5.56 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/5.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/5.56 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.56 % partial match(2): FGUSM-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.56 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/5.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/5.56
% 0.16/5.56 % Proof found!
% 0.16/5.56 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.16/5.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/5.56 % Parsed axioms : 85
% 0.16/5.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 38
% 0.16/5.56 % Initial clauses : 47
% 0.16/5.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.16/5.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 46
% 0.16/5.56 % Processed clauses : 470
% 0.16/5.56 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.16/5.56 % ...subsumed : 227
% 0.16/5.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 240
% 0.16/5.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.16/5.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.16/5.56 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Generated clauses : 1016
% 0.16/5.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 577
% 0.16/5.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Paramodulations : 1015
% 0.16/5.56 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.16/5.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Total rewrite steps : 534
% 0.16/5.56 % ...of those cached : 479
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 238
% 0.16/5.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 18
% 0.16/5.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.16/5.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 214
% 0.16/5.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 150
% 0.16/5.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 752
% 0.16/5.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.16/5.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 12387
% 0.16/5.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9102
% 0.16/5.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 203
% 0.16/5.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 47
% 0.16/5.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 14
% 0.16/5.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/5.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 16212
% 0.16/5.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 294
% 0.16/5.56
% 0.16/5.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/5.56 % User time : 0.032 s
% 0.16/5.56 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/5.56 % Total time : 0.035 s
% 0.16/5.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3700 pages
% 0.16/5.56
% 0.16/5.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/5.56 % User time : 0.036 s
% 0.16/5.56 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.16/5.56 % Total time : 0.047 s
% 0.16/5.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/5.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------