%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO056-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n004.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 0.19s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 19 ( 13 equ; 7 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 25 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(identity_for_equidistance,axiom,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO002-0.ax',identity_for_equidistance) ).
cnf(prove_v_equals_reflection,negated_conjecture,
v != reflection(u,v),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_v_equals_reflection) ).
cnf(segment_construction2,axiom,
equidistant(X1,extension(X2,X1,X3,X4),X3,X4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO002-0.ax',segment_construction2) ).
cnf(u_equals_v,hypothesis,
u = v,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',u_equals_v) ).
cnf(reflection,axiom,
reflection(X1,X2) = extension(X1,X2,X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO002-2.ax',reflection) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[identity_for_equidistance]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
v != reflection(u,v),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_v_equals_reflection]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
equidistant(X1,extension(X2,X1,X3,X4),X3,X4),
segment_construction2 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
v != reflection(u,v),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
u = v,
u_equals_v ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
reflection(X1,X2) = extension(X1,X2,X1,X2),
reflection ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
extension(X1,X2,X3,X3) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
reflection(v,v) != v,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
reflection(X1,X1) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GEO056-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.40 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.40 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.40 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.40 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.40 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.40 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.40 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.40 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 08:54:04 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.40 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.40 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.45 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.45 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 591544 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.19/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.19/0.47 % Search class: FGUSM-FFSF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.47 % partial match(1): FGUSM-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 591549 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.19/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.19/0.47 % Search class: FGUSM-FFSF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.47 % partial match(1): FGUSM-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.19/0.47
% 0.19/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 21
% 0.19/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 10
% 0.19/0.47 % Initial clauses : 11
% 0.19/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.19/0.47 % Processed clauses : 14
% 0.19/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 14
% 0.19/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.19/0.47 % Generated clauses : 10
% 0.19/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 9
% 0.19/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Paramodulations : 10
% 0.19/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.19/0.47 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.19/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 10
% 0.19/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 6
% 0.19/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 22
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.19/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.19/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.19/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.19/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 18
% 0.19/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.19/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 450
% 0.19/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 99
% 0.19/0.47
% 0.19/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.47 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.19/0.47 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.19/0.47
% 0.19/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.47 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.19/0.47 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.19/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.19/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------