%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO084-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 12:29:03 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.26s 0.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 26 ( 11 unt; 7 nHn; 24 RR)
% Number of literals : 51 ( 3 equ; 22 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 36 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(sum_defn_4,axiom,
( ~ incident_c(X4,X1)
| X1 != sum(X2,X3)
| incident_c(X4,X3)
| incident_c(X4,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO004-0.ax',sum_defn_4) ).
cnf(corollary_2_6_2_70,negated_conjecture,
~ part_of(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',corollary_2_6_2_70) ).
cnf(part_of_defn_1,axiom,
( ~ incident_c(X3,X1)
| ~ part_of(X1,X2)
| incident_c(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO004-0.ax',part_of_defn_1) ).
cnf(part_of_defn_2,axiom,
( part_of(X1,X2)
| incident_c(ax0_sk1(X1,X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO004-0.ax',part_of_defn_2) ).
cnf(part_of_defn_3,axiom,
( ~ incident_c(ax0_sk1(X1,X2),X2)
| part_of(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO004-0.ax',part_of_defn_3) ).
cnf(corollary_2_6_2_67,negated_conjecture,
part_of(sk14,sk16),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',corollary_2_6_2_67) ).
cnf(corollary_2_6_2_68,negated_conjecture,
part_of(sk15,sk16),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',corollary_2_6_2_68) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ incident_c(X4,X1)
| X1 != sum(X2,X3)
| incident_c(X4,X3)
| incident_c(X4,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[sum_defn_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ part_of(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[corollary_2_6_2_70]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ incident_c(X3,X1)
| ~ part_of(X1,X2)
| incident_c(X3,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[part_of_defn_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ incident_c(X4,X1)
| X1 != sum(X2,X3)
| incident_c(X4,X3)
| incident_c(X4,X2) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ part_of(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
( part_of(X1,X2)
| incident_c(ax0_sk1(X1,X2),X1) ),
part_of_defn_2 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ incident_c(ax0_sk1(X1,X2),X2)
| part_of(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[part_of_defn_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ incident_c(X3,X1)
| ~ part_of(X1,X2)
| incident_c(X3,X2) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
part_of(sk14,sk16),
corollary_2_6_2_67 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ incident_c(X1,sum(X3,X2))
| incident_c(X1,X3)
| incident_c(X1,X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
incident_c(ax0_sk1(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),sum(sk14,sk15)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ incident_c(ax0_sk1(X1,X2),X2)
| part_of(X1,X2) ),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
part_of(sk15,sk16),
corollary_2_6_2_68 ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( ~ incident_c(X1,sk14)
| incident_c(X1,sk16) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
( incident_c(ax0_sk1(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),sk14)
| incident_c(ax0_sk1(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),sk15) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
~ incident_c(ax0_sk1(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),sk16),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
( ~ incident_c(X1,sk15)
| incident_c(X1,sk16) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
incident_c(ax0_sk1(sum(sk14,sk15),sk16),sk15),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_22]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : GEO084-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.45 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.45 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.45 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.45 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.45 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.45 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 10:21:39 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.54 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
% 0.26/0.59 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.26/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2686849 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.26/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.59 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.59 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMS31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.59 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S0Y with 209s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 189s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting 208_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S070I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % 208_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S070I with pid 2686860 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Result found by 208_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S070I
% 0.26/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.59 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.59 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMS31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.59 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S0Y with 209s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 189s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Starting 208_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S070I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.59 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.26/0.59 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.26/0.59
% 0.26/0.59 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.59 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.26/0.59 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.59 % Parsed axioms : 52
% 0.26/0.59 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Initial clauses : 52
% 0.26/0.59 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.26/0.59 % Initial clauses in saturation : 47
% 0.26/0.59 % Processed clauses : 117
% 0.26/0.59 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.26/0.59 % ...remaining for further processing : 114
% 0.26/0.59 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.26/0.59 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.26/0.59 % Generated clauses : 69
% 0.26/0.59 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 62
% 0.26/0.59 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Paramodulations : 65
% 0.26/0.59 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.26/0.59 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.26/0.59 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.59 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.59 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.59 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.59 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.59 % Current number of processed clauses : 62
% 0.26/0.59 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 13
% 0.26/0.59 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.26/0.59 % Non-unit-clauses : 46
% 0.26/0.59 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 39
% 0.26/0.59 % ...number of literals in the above : 147
% 0.26/0.59 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Current number of archived clauses : 48
% 0.26/0.59 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 741
% 0.26/0.59 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 458
% 0.26/0.59 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.26/0.59 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 36
% 0.26/0.59 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.26/0.59 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.26/0.59 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.59 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2775
% 0.26/0.59 % Search garbage collected termcells : 128
% 0.26/0.59
% 0.26/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.59 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.26/0.59 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.26/0.59 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.26/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 3424 pages
% 0.26/0.59
% 0.26/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.59 % User time : 0.060 s
% 0.26/0.59 % System time : 0.020 s
% 0.26/0.59 % Total time : 0.080 s
% 0.26/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.26/0.59 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------