%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO226+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 : n016.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 12:29:48 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 54 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 61 ( 25 ~; 14 |; 14 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 8 =>; 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 : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 ( 0 sgn 16 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(apart1,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ distinct_points(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',apart1) ).
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X8,X9] :
( ( convergent_lines(X8,X9)
& line(X9)
& line(X8) )
=> ? [X1] :
( point(X1)
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X9)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X8) ) ) ),
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_3,plain,
! [X1] : ~ distinct_points(X1,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[apart1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X8,X9] :
( ( convergent_lines(X8,X9)
& line(X9)
& line(X8) )
=> ? [X1] :
( point(X1)
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X9)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X8) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X43] : ~ distinct_points(X43,X43),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X16,X17,X18] :
( ( ~ convergent_lines(X16,X17)
| distinct_points(X18,intersection_point(X16,X17))
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X18,X17) )
& ( ~ convergent_lines(X16,X17)
| distinct_points(X18,intersection_point(X16,X17))
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X18,X16) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[con2])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X8,X9] :
( ( convergent_lines(X8,X9)
& line(X9)
& line(X8) )
=> ? [X1] :
( point(X1)
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X9)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X8) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
~ distinct_points(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,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_6]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
! [X12] :
( ( apart_point_and_line(X12,esk2_0)
| apart_point_and_line(X12,esk1_0) )
& point(X12)
& convergent_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& line(esk2_0)
& line(esk1_0) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])])]) ).
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_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ convergent_lines(X1,esk2_0)
| apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,esk2_0),esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
convergent_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : GEO226+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.47 % Computer : n016.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 14:03:52 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 % sh5l with pid 243459 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Result found by sh5l
% 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 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.24/0.60 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 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 243466 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 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.24/0.60 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 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 : 17
% 0.24/0.60 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Initial clauses : 23
% 0.24/0.60 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Initial clauses in saturation : 23
% 0.24/0.60 % Processed clauses : 57
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.24/0.60 % ...subsumed : 14
% 0.24/0.60 % ...remaining for further processing : 42
% 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 : 2
% 0.24/0.60 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.24/0.60 % Generated clauses : 105
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 86
% 0.24/0.60 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Paramodulations : 91
% 0.24/0.60 % Factorizations : 14
% 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 : 25
% 0.24/0.60 % ...of those cached : 18
% 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 : 39
% 0.24/0.60 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.24/0.60 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.60 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.24/0.60 % Non-unit-clauses : 29
% 0.24/0.60 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 48
% 0.24/0.60 % ...number of literals in the above : 176
% 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) : 94
% 0.24/0.60 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 79
% 0.24/0.60 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 13
% 0.24/0.60 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 19
% 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 : 2608
% 0.24/0.60 % Search garbage collected termcells : 318
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.60 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.24/0.60 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 3656 pages
% 0.24/0.60
% 0.24/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.60 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.24/0.60 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.24/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.60 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------