↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : GEO185+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n017.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 0.14s 10.48s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   11
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   34 (   6 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   79 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   76 (  31   ~;  23   |;  11   &)
%                                         (   4 <=>;   7  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    9 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   5 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   51 (   0 sgn  38   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
      ( ( equal_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5))
        & convergent_lines(X4,X5)
        & distinct_points(X1,X2) )
     => ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X5)
        & incident_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).

fof(a4,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    <=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+6.ax',a4) ).

fof(ax1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( equal_points(X1,X2)
    <=> ~ distinct_points(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+6.ax',ax1) ).

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/sandbox/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/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ci3) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
        ( ( equal_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5))
          & convergent_lines(X4,X5)
          & distinct_points(X1,X2) )
       => ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X5)
          & incident_point_and_line(X1,X4) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    <=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a4]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
      | ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) )
    & equal_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_6])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X15,X16] :
      ( ( incident_point_and_line(X15,X16)
        | apart_point_and_line(X15,X16) )
      & ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X15,X16)
        | ~ incident_point_and_line(X15,X16) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])]) ).

fof(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( equal_points(X1,X2)
    <=> ~ distinct_points(X1,X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ax1]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
    | ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

fof(c_0_13,plain,
    ! [X17,X18] :
      ( ( equal_points(X17,X18)
        | distinct_points(X17,X18) )
      & ( ~ distinct_points(X17,X18)
        | ~ equal_points(X17,X18) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])])]) ).

fof(c_0_14,plain,
    ! [X37,X38,X39] :
      ( apart_point_and_line(X39,X38)
      | distinct_points(X37,X39)
      | ~ apart_point_and_line(X37,X38) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ceq1])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

fof(c_0_16,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_17,plain,
    ( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
    | ~ equal_points(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    equal_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    | apart_point_and_line(X3,X2)
    | distinct_points(X1,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_12]) ).

fof(c_0_21,plain,
    ! [X21,X22] :
      ( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X21,X22),X22)
      | ~ convergent_lines(X21,X22) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_16])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    ~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,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_19,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    ( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2)
    | ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,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_22,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

fof(c_0_27,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_28,negated_conjecture,
    apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]),c_0_26])]) ).

fof(c_0_29,plain,
    ! [X19,X20] :
      ( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X19,X20),X19)
      | ~ convergent_lines(X19,X20) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_27])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
    ( distinct_points(esk1_0,X1)
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,esk3_0) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_28]) ).

cnf(c_0_31,plain,
    ( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1)
    | ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_29]) ).

cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
    apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk3_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_30]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_32]),c_0_26])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : GEO185+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/10.39  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.11/10.39  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/10.39  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/10.39  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/10.39  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/10.39  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/10.39  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/10.39  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 13:02:36 UTC 2026
% 0.11/10.39  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/10.39  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/10.44  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/10.44  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
% 0.14/10.48  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/10.48  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/10.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % new_bool_1 with pid 4155401 completed with status 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/10.48  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/10.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/10.48  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/10.48  % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/10.48  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % SubtermCWHack with pid 4155408 completed with status 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/10.48  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/10.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/10.48  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/10.48  % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/10.48  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/10.48  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/10.48  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.14/10.48  
% 0.14/10.48  % Proof found!
% 0.14/10.48  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/10.48  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/10.48  % Parsed axioms                        : 36
% 0.14/10.48  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 3
% 0.14/10.48  % Initial clauses                      : 44
% 0.14/10.48  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 44
% 0.14/10.48  % Processed clauses                    : 63
% 0.14/10.48  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % ...subsumed                          : 9
% 0.14/10.48  % ...remaining for further processing  : 54
% 0.14/10.48  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 0.14/10.48  % Generated clauses                    : 69
% 0.14/10.48  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 56
% 0.14/10.48  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Paramodulations                      : 67
% 0.14/10.48  % Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.14/10.48  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Total rewrite steps                  : 15
% 0.14/10.48  % ...of those cached                   : 10
% 0.14/10.48  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/10.48  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/10.48  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/10.48  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/10.48  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/10.48  % Current number of processed clauses  : 51
% 0.14/10.48  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 10
% 0.14/10.48  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/10.48  %    Negative unit clauses             : 8
% 0.14/10.48  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 33
% 0.14/10.48  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 35
% 0.14/10.48  % ...number of literals in the above   : 123
% 0.14/10.48  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 0.14/10.48  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 125
% 0.14/10.48  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 99
% 0.14/10.48  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 9
% 0.14/10.48  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24
% 0.14/10.48  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.14/10.48  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.14/10.48  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/10.48  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3738
% 0.14/10.48  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 495
% 0.14/10.48  
% 0.14/10.48  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/10.48  % User time                : 0.007 s
% 0.14/10.48  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.14/10.48  % Total time               : 0.010 s
% 0.14/10.48  % Maximum resident set size: 3936 pages
% 0.14/10.48  
% 0.14/10.48  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/10.48  % User time                : 0.009 s
% 0.14/10.48  % System time              : 0.009 s
% 0.14/10.48  % Total time               : 0.018 s
% 0.14/10.48  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/10.48  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------