%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO185+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n007.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 12:27:37 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 43 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 51 ( 22 ~; 11 |; 13 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 5 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 : 24 ( 0 sgn 18 !; 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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).
fof(con2,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ( ( apart_point_and_line(X3,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X3,X1) )
=> distinct_points(X3,intersection_point(X1,X2)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',con2) ).
fof(c_0_2,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_3,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_2]) ).
fof(c_0_4,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_3])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X24,X25,X26] :
( ( ~ convergent_lines(X24,X25)
| distinct_points(X26,intersection_point(X24,X25))
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X26,X25) )
& ( ~ convergent_lines(X24,X25)
| distinct_points(X26,intersection_point(X24,X25))
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X26,X24) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[con2])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ convergent_lines(X3,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X3,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
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_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ convergent_lines(X2,X3)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X2,X3)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : GEO185+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.47 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.21/0.47 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.21/0.47 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.21/0.47 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.21/0.47 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.21/0.47 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.21/0.47 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.21/0.47 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 13:10:50 UTC 2026
% 0.21/0.47 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.54 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
% 0.24/0.60 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % new_bool_3 with pid 2942831 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.60 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.60 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2942835 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.60 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.60 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.60 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.60 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.60 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.60 % Parsed axioms : 13
% 0.24/0.60 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.24/0.60 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.24/0.60 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.24/0.60 % Processed clauses : 33
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.24/0.60 % ...remaining for further processing : 30
% 0.24/0.60 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.24/0.60 % Generated clauses : 47
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 36
% 0.24/0.60 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Paramodulations : 44
% 0.24/0.60 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.24/0.60 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Total rewrite steps : 14
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of those cached : 10
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of processed clauses : 27
% 0.24/0.60 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.24/0.60 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.24/0.60 % Non-unit-clauses : 17
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
% 0.24/0.60 % ...number of literals in the above : 64
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.24/0.60 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 18
% 0.24/0.60 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 15
% 0.24/0.60 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.24/0.60 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.24/0.60 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.24/0.60 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.24/0.60 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1565
% 0.24/0.60 % Search garbage collected termcells : 214
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.60 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.24/0.60 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.60 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.24/0.60 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.60 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------