%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO176+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 12:27:34 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 54 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 48 ( 17 ~; 17 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 7 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 0 sgn 26 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ( apart_point_and_line(X1,X5)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) )
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).
fof(ceq1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
=> ( apart_point_and_line(X3,X2)
| distinct_points(X1,X3) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ceq1) ).
fof(ci4,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ci4) ).
fof(ci3,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ci3) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ( apart_point_and_line(X1,X5)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) )
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X23,X24,X25] :
( apart_point_and_line(X25,X24)
| distinct_points(X23,X25)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X23,X24) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ceq1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0))
& ( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) )
& convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0)
& distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ci4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X3,X2)
| distinct_points(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X28,X29] :
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X28,X29),X29)
| ~ convergent_lines(X28,X29) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_points(esk1_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,esk4_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk4_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_16,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ci3]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]) ).
fof(c_0_18,plain,
! [X26,X27] :
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X26,X27),X26)
| ~ convergent_lines(X26,X27) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_16])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_points(esk1_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk3_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GEO176+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.40 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.40 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.40 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.40 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/0.40 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/0.41 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.41 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.41 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 13:03:47 UTC 2026
% 0.15/0.41 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.41 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.49 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
% 0.25/0.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % new_bool_3 with pid 550862 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.25/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.56 % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 550869 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/0.56 % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.56
% 0.25/0.56 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.56 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/0.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.56 % Parsed axioms : 36
% 0.25/0.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 5
% 0.25/0.56 % Initial clauses : 40
% 0.25/0.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 40
% 0.25/0.56 % Processed clauses : 57
% 0.25/0.56 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % ...subsumed : 9
% 0.25/0.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 48
% 0.25/0.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.25/0.56 % Generated clauses : 64
% 0.25/0.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 53
% 0.25/0.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Paramodulations : 62
% 0.25/0.56 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.25/0.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Total rewrite steps : 15
% 0.25/0.56 % ...of those cached : 10
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 45
% 0.25/0.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.25/0.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.25/0.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 28
% 0.25/0.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 34
% 0.25/0.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 119
% 0.25/0.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.25/0.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 75
% 0.25/0.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 57
% 0.25/0.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 9
% 0.25/0.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 0.25/0.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.25/0.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.25/0.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3516
% 0.25/0.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 473
% 0.25/0.56
% 0.25/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.56 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.25/0.56 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.56 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.25/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3680 pages
% 0.25/0.56
% 0.25/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.56 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.25/0.56 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.56 % Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.25/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------