%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO185+1 : 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 : n014.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 12:29:32 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 59 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 62 ( 27 ~; 15 |; 12 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 8 =>; 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 : 39 ( 0 sgn 30 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5))
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X5)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
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] :
( ( ~ distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5))
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X5)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5))
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& distinct_points(X1,X2) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X5)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X10,X11,X12] :
( apart_point_and_line(X12,X11)
| distinct_points(X10,X12)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X10,X11) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ceq1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) )
& ~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_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])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,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_9,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X3,X2)
| distinct_points(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,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_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X23,X24] :
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X23,X24),X24)
| ~ convergent_lines(X23,X24) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,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_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,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_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_17,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_18,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]) ).
fof(c_0_19,plain,
! [X21,X22] :
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X21,X22),X21)
| ~ convergent_lines(X21,X22) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_17])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_points(esk1_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk3_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GEO185+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n014.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 13:10:35 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.15/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % new_bool_3 with pid 1668026 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1668029 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.43
% 0.15/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 15
% 0.15/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.15/0.43 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.15/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.15/0.43 % Processed clauses : 25
% 0.15/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.15/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.15/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.15/0.43 % Generated clauses : 27
% 0.15/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 22
% 0.15/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Paramodulations : 27
% 0.15/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 9
% 0.15/0.43 % ...of those cached : 6
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 21
% 0.15/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.15/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.15/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 13
% 0.15/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 11
% 0.15/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 36
% 0.15/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
% 0.15/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.15/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.15/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.15/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.15/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1448
% 0.15/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 202
% 0.15/0.43
% 0.15/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.43 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.43 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.43 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.15/0.43
% 0.15/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.43 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.43 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.43 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.15/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------