%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO183+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/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 12:29:31 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.10s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 63 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 66 ( 27 ~; 19 |; 14 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 39 ( 0 sgn 27 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ distinct_lines(X4,line_connecting(X1,X2))
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,X4)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).
fof(ceq2,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
=> ( apart_point_and_line(X1,X3)
| distinct_lines(X2,X3) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',ceq2) ).
fof(apart1,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ distinct_points(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',apart1) ).
fof(con1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( distinct_points(X1,X2)
=> ( apart_point_and_line(X3,line_connecting(X1,X2))
=> ( distinct_points(X3,X2)
& distinct_points(X3,X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',con1) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ distinct_lines(X4,line_connecting(X1,X2))
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,X4)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ distinct_lines(X4,line_connecting(X1,X2))
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,X4)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X17,X18,X19] :
( apart_point_and_line(X17,X19)
| distinct_lines(X18,X19)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X17,X18) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ceq2])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) )
& ~ distinct_lines(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_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_5])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X3)
| distinct_lines(X2,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X1] : ~ distinct_points(X1,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[apart1]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X26,X27,X28] :
( ( ~ distinct_points(X26,X27)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X28,line_connecting(X26,X27))
| distinct_points(X28,X27) )
& ( ~ distinct_points(X26,X27)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X28,line_connecting(X26,X27))
| distinct_points(X28,X26) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[con1])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ distinct_lines(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_lines(esk3_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X33] : ~ distinct_points(X33,X33),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X2,X3)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X2,X3))
| distinct_points(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
~ distinct_points(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_lines(esk3_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X3,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X3,X2))
| distinct_points(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_17])]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GEO183+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 13:08:55 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.40 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
% 0.10/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.10/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % new_bool_3 with pid 2895822 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.10/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.42 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2895828 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.42 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.42
% 0.10/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.10/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 13
% 0.10/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.10/0.42 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.10/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.10/0.42 % Processed clauses : 40
% 0.10/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % ...subsumed : 7
% 0.10/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 33
% 0.10/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.10/0.42 % Generated clauses : 58
% 0.10/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 45
% 0.10/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Paramodulations : 54
% 0.10/0.42 % Factorizations : 4
% 0.10/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 18
% 0.10/0.42 % ...of those cached : 13
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 29
% 0.10/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.10/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.10/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 18
% 0.10/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
% 0.10/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 68
% 0.10/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.10/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 32
% 0.10/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 28
% 0.10/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 7
% 0.10/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.10/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.10/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.10/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.10/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1656
% 0.10/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 207
% 0.10/0.42
% 0.10/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.42 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.10/0.42 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.10/0.42 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.10/0.42
% 0.10/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.42 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.42 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.10/0.42 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.10/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.10/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------