%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO237+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 : n007.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 12:27:56 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.12s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 42 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 42 ( 16 ~; 13 |; 7 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 30 ( 6 sgn 20 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(a2_defns,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( right_apart_point(X1,X2)
<=> left_apart_point(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',a2_defns) ).
fof(ax10_basics,axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
~ ( left_apart_point(X3,reverse_line(X4))
| left_apart_point(X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',ax10_basics) ).
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X3,X6,X7,X4] :
( apart_point_and_line(X7,X4)
=> ( divides_points(X4,X3,X6)
=> ( divides_points(X4,X6,X7)
| divides_points(X4,X3,X7) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).
fof(a6_defns,axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
( apart_point_and_line(X3,X4)
<=> ( right_apart_point(X3,X4)
| left_apart_point(X3,X4) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',a6_defns) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X23,X24] :
( ( right_apart_point(X23,X24)
| ~ left_apart_point(X23,reverse_line(X24)) )
& ( left_apart_point(X23,reverse_line(X24))
| ~ right_apart_point(X23,X24) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[a2_defns])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X18,X19] :
( ~ left_apart_point(X18,reverse_line(X19))
& ~ left_apart_point(X18,X19) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax10_basics])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X3,X6,X7,X4] :
( apart_point_and_line(X7,X4)
=> ( divides_points(X4,X3,X6)
=> ( divides_points(X4,X6,X7)
| divides_points(X4,X3,X7) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X25,X26] :
( ( apart_point_and_line(X25,X26)
| ~ right_apart_point(X25,X26) )
& ( apart_point_and_line(X25,X26)
| ~ left_apart_point(X25,X26) )
& ( right_apart_point(X25,X26)
| left_apart_point(X25,X26)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X25,X26) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[a6_defns])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ right_apart_point(X1,X2)
| left_apart_point(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
~ left_apart_point(X1,X2),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ divides_points(esk4_0,esk2_0,esk3_0)
& ~ divides_points(esk4_0,esk1_0,esk3_0)
& divides_points(esk4_0,esk1_0,esk2_0)
& apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,esk4_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| right_apart_point(X1,X2)
| left_apart_point(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
~ right_apart_point(X1,X2),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GEO237+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 14:18:04 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40 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
% 0.12/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % new_bool_1 with pid 3034518 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHNF-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3034520 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHNF-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 37
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 19
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses : 36
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 36
% 0.12/0.42 % Processed clauses : 23
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...subsumed : 5
% 0.12/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 18
% 0.12/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Generated clauses : 4
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 14
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.12/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 50
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.12/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.12/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2232
% 0.12/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 525
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3684 pages
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.12/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------