↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : GEO206+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 : n015.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 12:27:46 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.11s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   25 (  12 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   54 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   56 (  27   ~;  19   |;   5   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   47 (   2 sgn  33   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( ( ~ convergent_lines(X2,X3)
        & ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) )
     => ~ distinct_lines(X2,parallel_through_point(X3,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).

fof(cup1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( distinct_lines(X2,X3)
     => ( convergent_lines(X2,X3)
        | apart_point_and_line(X1,X3)
        | apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+2.ax',cup1) ).

fof(cp1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] : ~ convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(X2,X1),X2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+2.ax',cp1) ).

fof(apart6,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
     => ( convergent_lines(X2,X3)
        | convergent_lines(X1,X3) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',apart6) ).

fof(cp2,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] : ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,parallel_through_point(X2,X1)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+2.ax',cp2) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
        ( ( ~ convergent_lines(X2,X3)
          & ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) )
       => ~ distinct_lines(X2,parallel_through_point(X3,X1)) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
        ( ( ~ convergent_lines(X2,X3)
          & ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) )
       => ~ distinct_lines(X2,parallel_through_point(X3,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X40,X41,X42] :
      ( convergent_lines(X41,X42)
      | apart_point_and_line(X40,X42)
      | apart_point_and_line(X40,X41)
      | ~ distinct_lines(X41,X42) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[cup1])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( distinct_lines(esk2_0,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0))
    & ~ convergent_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0)
    & ~ apart_point_and_line(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,
    ! [X1,X2] : ~ convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(X2,X1),X2),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cp1]) ).

fof(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X15,X16,X17] :
      ( convergent_lines(X16,X17)
      | convergent_lines(X15,X17)
      | ~ convergent_lines(X15,X16) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[apart6])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ distinct_lines(X1,X2)
    | convergent_lines(X1,X2)
    | apart_point_and_line(X3,X2)
    | apart_point_and_line(X3,X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    distinct_lines(esk2_0,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

fof(c_0_13,plain,
    ! [X1,X2] : ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,parallel_through_point(X2,X1)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cp2]) ).

fof(c_0_14,plain,
    ! [X36,X37] : ~ convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(X37,X36),X37),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
    | convergent_lines(X2,X3)
    | convergent_lines(X1,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ( convergent_lines(esk2_0,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0))
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

fof(c_0_17,plain,
    ! [X38,X39] : ~ apart_point_and_line(X38,parallel_through_point(X39,X38)),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_13])]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ~ convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(X1,X2),X1),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    ( convergent_lines(esk2_0,X2)
    | convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0),X2)
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ~ convergent_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,parallel_through_point(X2,X1)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    ( apart_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(X1,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0)) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    ~ apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_23]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : GEO206+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 13:26:05 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.39  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.39  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
% 0.11/0.42  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3340024 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.11/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.42  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.42  % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.42  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3340030 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.11/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.42  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.42  % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.42  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.42  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.42  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.11/0.42  
% 0.11/0.42  % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.42  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/0.42  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.42  % Parsed axioms                        : 16
% 0.11/0.42  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Initial clauses                      : 20
% 0.11/0.42  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 20
% 0.11/0.42  % Processed clauses                    : 59
% 0.11/0.42  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % ...subsumed                          : 5
% 0.11/0.42  % ...remaining for further processing  : 54
% 0.11/0.42  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.11/0.42  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Generated clauses                    : 62
% 0.11/0.42  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 56
% 0.11/0.42  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Paramodulations                      : 60
% 0.11/0.42  % Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.11/0.42  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Total rewrite steps                  : 4
% 0.11/0.42  % ...of those cached                   : 3
% 0.11/0.42  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.11/0.42  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.11/0.42  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.11/0.42  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.11/0.42  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.11/0.42  % Current number of processed clauses  : 32
% 0.11/0.42  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1
% 0.11/0.42  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.42  %    Negative unit clauses             : 7
% 0.11/0.42  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 24
% 0.11/0.42  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 31
% 0.11/0.42  % ...number of literals in the above   : 158
% 0.11/0.42  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Current number of archived clauses   : 22
% 0.11/0.42  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 73
% 0.11/0.42  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 48
% 0.11/0.42  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 6
% 0.11/0.42  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.11/0.42  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.11/0.42  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2516
% 0.11/0.42  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 226
% 0.11/0.42  
% 0.11/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.42  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.42  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.42  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.11/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 3600 pages
% 0.11/0.42  
% 0.11/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.42  % User time                : 0.015 s
% 0.11/0.42  % System time              : 0.016 s
% 0.11/0.42  % Total time               : 0.031 s
% 0.11/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.11/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------