%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO232+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n004.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 12:27:54 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 0.98s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 23 ( 9 ~; 11 |; 1 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 1 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 1 sgn 16 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X4] : unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X4,X4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).
fof(a1_defns,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2)
<=> unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',a1_defns) ).
fof(ax8_basics,axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( unequally_directed_lines(X4,reverse_line(X5))
| unequally_directed_lines(X4,X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',ax8_basics) ).
fof(ax6_basics,axiom,
! [X4,X5,X8] :
( unequally_directed_lines(X4,X5)
=> ( unequally_directed_lines(X5,X8)
| unequally_directed_lines(X4,X8) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',ax6_basics) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4] : unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X4,X4),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(esk1_0,esk1_0),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X10,X11] :
( ( unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X10,X11)
| ~ unequally_directed_lines(X10,reverse_line(X11)) )
& ( unequally_directed_lines(X10,reverse_line(X11))
| ~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X10,X11) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[a1_defns])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(esk1_0,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2))
| unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X18,X19] :
( unequally_directed_lines(X18,reverse_line(X19))
| unequally_directed_lines(X18,X19) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax8_basics]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X12,X13,X14] :
( unequally_directed_lines(X13,X14)
| unequally_directed_lines(X12,X14)
| ~ unequally_directed_lines(X12,X13) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax6_basics])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ unequally_directed_lines(esk1_0,reverse_line(esk1_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2))
| unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2)
| unequally_directed_lines(X2,X3)
| unequally_directed_lines(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
unequally_directed_lines(esk1_0,esk1_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
unequally_directed_lines(esk1_0,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : GEO232+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.87 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.87 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.87 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.87 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.16/0.87 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.16/0.87 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.87 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.87 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 14:13:23 UTC 2026
% 0.16/0.87 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.87 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.94 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.95 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/0.98 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.21/0.98 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.98 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % new_bool_1 with pid 933051 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.21/0.98 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.98 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/0.98 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.98 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.98 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % SubtermCWHack with pid 933053 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.21/0.98 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.98 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/0.98 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.98 % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.98 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.98 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.98 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.21/0.98
% 0.21/0.98 % Proof found!
% 0.21/0.98 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.98 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/0.98 % Parsed axioms : 37
% 0.21/0.98 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 32
% 0.21/0.98 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.21/0.98 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.21/0.98 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.21/0.98 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.21/0.98 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.21/0.98 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.21/0.98 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.21/0.98 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Paramodulations : 6
% 0.21/0.98 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % NegExts : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.21/0.98 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.98 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.98 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.98 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.98 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.98 % Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.21/0.98 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.21/0.98 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.21/0.98 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.21/0.98 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5
% 0.21/0.98 % ...number of literals in the above : 19
% 0.21/0.98 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.21/0.98 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.21/0.98 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.21/0.98 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.21/0.98 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/0.98 % Termbank termtop insertions : 944
% 0.21/0.98 % Search garbage collected termcells : 343
% 0.21/0.98
% 0.21/0.98 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.98 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.21/0.98 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.21/0.98 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.21/0.98 % Maximum resident set size: 3940 pages
% 0.21/0.98
% 0.21/0.98 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.98 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.21/0.98 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.21/0.98 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.21/0.98 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.21/0.98 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------