%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.7
% Problem : GEO200+2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Mon Jun 24 06:04:28 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.97s 1.07s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.97s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.12 % Problem : GEO200+2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.10/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Fri Jun 21 09:00:39 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.97/1.06 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.06 % File :CSE---1.7
% 0.97/1.06 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.97/1.06 % Transform :cnf
% 0.97/1.06 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.97/1.06 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.97/1.06
% 0.97/1.06 % Result :Theorem 0.440000s
% 0.97/1.06 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.440000s
% 0.97/1.06 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.06 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.06 % File : GEO200+2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.97/1.06 % Domain : Geometry (Constructive)
% 0.97/1.06 % Problem : Line equals its converse
% 0.97/1.06 % Version : [vPl95] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.97/1.06 % English : If the points X and Y are distinct, then the line connecting
% 0.97/1.06 % X and Y is equal to the line connecting Y and X.
% 0.97/1.06
% 0.97/1.06 % Refs : [vPl95] von Plato (1995), The Axioms of Constructive Geometry
% 0.97/1.06 % : [Li97] Li (1997), Replacing the Axioms for Connecting Lines a
% 0.97/1.06 % : [Li98] Li (1998), A Shorter and Intuitive Axiom to Replace th
% 0.97/1.06 % : [ROK06] Raths et al. (2006), The ILTP Problem Library for Intu
% 0.97/1.06 % Source : [ILTP]
% 0.97/1.06 % Names :
% 0.97/1.06
% 0.97/1.06 % Status : Theorem
% 0.97/1.06 % Rating : 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.04 v5.3.0, 0.13 v5.2.0, 0.14 v5.0.0, 0.05 v4.1.0, 0.06 v4.0.1, 0.05 v3.7.0, 0.14 v3.5.0, 0.00 v3.3.0
% 0.97/1.06 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% 0.97/1.06 % Number of atoms : 36 ( 0 equ)
% 0.97/1.06 % Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% 0.97/1.06 % Number of connectives : 27 ( 4 ~; 9 |; 2 &)
% 0.97/1.06 % ( 0 <=>; 12 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.97/1.06 % Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg)
% 0.97/1.06 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.97/1.06 % Number of predicates : 4 ( 4 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 0.97/1.06 % Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 con; 2-2 aty)
% 0.97/1.06 % Number of variables : 32 ( 32 !; 0 ?)
% 0.97/1.06 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.97/1.06
% 0.97/1.06 % Comments : Definitions unfolded, hence Especial.
% 0.97/1.06 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.06 include('Axioms/GEO008+0.ax').
% 0.97/1.07 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.07 fof(con,conjecture,
% 0.97/1.07 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.97/1.07 ( distinct_points(X,Y)
% 0.97/1.07 => ~ distinct_lines(line_connecting(X,Y),line_connecting(Y,X)) ) ).
% 0.97/1.07
% 0.97/1.07 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.07 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.07 % Proof found
% 0.97/1.07 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.97/1.07 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.97/1.07 %ClaNum:16(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.97/1.07 %VarNum:80(SingletonVarNum:36)
% 0.97/1.07 %MaxLitNum:6
% 0.97/1.07 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.97/1.07 %SharedTerms:6
% 0.97/1.07 %goalClause: 1 2
% 0.97/1.07 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.97/1.07 [1]P1(a1,a2)
% 0.97/1.07 [2]P2(f3(a1,a2),f3(a2,a1))
% 0.97/1.07 [3]~P1(x31,x31)
% 0.97/1.07 [4]~P2(x41,x41)
% 0.97/1.07 [5]~P3(x51,x51)
% 0.97/1.07 [6]~P3(x61,x62)+P2(x61,x62)
% 0.97/1.07 [7]~P1(x73,x71)+P1(x71,x72)+P1(x73,x72)
% 0.97/1.07 [8]~P4(x81,x83)+P1(x81,x82)+P4(x82,x83)
% 0.97/1.07 [9]~P2(x93,x91)+P2(x91,x92)+P2(x93,x92)
% 0.97/1.07 [10]~P4(x103,x101)+P2(x101,x102)+P4(x103,x102)
% 0.97/1.07 [11]~P3(x113,x111)+P3(x111,x112)+P3(x113,x112)
% 0.97/1.07 [12]~P3(x122,x123)+~P4(x121,x123)+P1(x121,f4(x122,x123))
% 0.97/1.07 [13]~P3(x132,x133)+~P4(x131,x132)+P1(x131,f4(x132,x133))
% 0.97/1.07 [14]P1(x141,x142)+~P1(x143,x142)+~P4(x141,f3(x143,x142))
% 0.97/1.07 [15]P1(x151,x152)+~P1(x152,x153)+~P4(x151,f3(x152,x153))
% 0.97/1.07 [16]P4(x164,x163)+~P1(x164,x161)+~P2(x163,x162)+P4(x161,x162)+P4(x161,x163)+P4(x164,x162)
% 0.97/1.07 %EqnAxiom
% 0.97/1.07
% 0.97/1.07 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(17,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (P1(a2,a1)),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3,7])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(20,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (P2(f3(a2,a1),f3(a1,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3,4,7,9])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(31,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (~P4(a2,f3(a1,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[3,1,8,14])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(32,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (~P4(a1,f3(a1,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[4,3,1,10,15])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(34,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (~P4(a1,f3(a2,a1))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3,7,14])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(35,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (~P4(x351,f3(a1,a2))+~P4(a2,f3(x351,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[31,3,8,14])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(39,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (~P4(a2,f3(a2,a1))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[4,17,3,10,15])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(65,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (~P4(a2,f3(a2,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[34,17,32,39,2,35,16])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(70,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (P4(a1,f3(a2,a2))+~P2(f3(a2,a1),f3(a2,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3,65,34,39,7,16])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(92,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (P2(f3(a1,a2),f3(a2,a2))+P4(a1,f3(a2,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,70,9])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(115,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 (P4(a1,f3(a2,a2))),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[65,32,1,31,92,16])).
% 0.97/1.07 cnf(118,plain,
% 0.97/1.07 ($false),
% 0.97/1.07 inference(scs_inference,[],[32,1,115,20,31,34,39,10,16]),
% 0.97/1.07 ['proof']).
% 0.97/1.07 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.97/1.07 % Total time :0.440000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------