↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : GEO262+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v6.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n012.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 12:28:02 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.09s 0.48s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   19 (   5 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   65 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   73 (  27   ~;  15   |;  26   &)
%                                         (   1 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   15 (   6 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   5 usr;   1 prp; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   40 (   2 sgn  30   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
    ! [X2,X3,X6,X1,X4,X5] :
      ( ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X4,X6)
        & convergent_lines(X3,X6)
        & convergent_lines(X2,X6)
        & ~ apart_point_and_line(X4,X3)
        & convergent_lines(X2,X3)
        & between_on_line(X2,X1,X4,X5) )
     => between_on_line(X3,intersection_point(X3,parallel_through_point(X6,X1)),X4,intersection_point(X3,parallel_through_point(X6,X5))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).

fof(oag9,axiom,
    ! [X2,X3] :
      ( ( unequally_directed_lines(X2,reverse_line(X3))
        & unequally_directed_lines(X2,X3) )
     => ( left_convergent_lines(X2,reverse_line(X3))
        | left_convergent_lines(X2,X3) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO007+0.ax',oag9) ).

fof(oag11,axiom,
    ! [X2,X3] :
      ~ ( left_convergent_lines(X2,reverse_line(X3))
        | left_convergent_lines(X2,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO007+0.ax',oag11) ).

fof(con_def,axiom,
    ! [X2,X3] :
      ( convergent_lines(X2,X3)
    <=> ( unequally_directed_lines(X2,reverse_line(X3))
        & unequally_directed_lines(X2,X3) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO007+0.ax',con_def) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X2,X3,X6,X1,X4,X5] :
        ( ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X4,X6)
          & convergent_lines(X3,X6)
          & convergent_lines(X2,X6)
          & ~ apart_point_and_line(X4,X3)
          & convergent_lines(X2,X3)
          & between_on_line(X2,X1,X4,X5) )
       => between_on_line(X3,intersection_point(X3,parallel_through_point(X6,X1)),X4,intersection_point(X3,parallel_through_point(X6,X5))) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X2,X3,X6,X1,X4,X5] :
        ( ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X4,X6)
          & convergent_lines(X3,X6)
          & convergent_lines(X2,X6)
          & ~ apart_point_and_line(X4,X3)
          & convergent_lines(X2,X3)
          & between_on_line(X2,X1,X4,X5) )
       => between_on_line(X3,intersection_point(X3,parallel_through_point(X6,X1)),X4,intersection_point(X3,parallel_through_point(X6,X5))) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X62,X63] :
      ( left_convergent_lines(X62,reverse_line(X63))
      | left_convergent_lines(X62,X63)
      | ~ unequally_directed_lines(X62,reverse_line(X63))
      | ~ unequally_directed_lines(X62,X63) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[oag9])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X64,X65] :
      ( ~ left_convergent_lines(X64,reverse_line(X65))
      & ~ left_convergent_lines(X64,X65) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[oag11])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X31,X32] :
      ( ( convergent_lines(X31,X32)
        | ~ unequally_directed_lines(X31,reverse_line(X32))
        | ~ unequally_directed_lines(X31,X32) )
      & ( ~ convergent_lines(X31,X32)
        | unequally_directed_lines(X31,reverse_line(X32)) )
      & ( ~ convergent_lines(X31,X32)
        | unequally_directed_lines(X31,X32) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[con_def])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ between_on_line(esk2_0,intersection_point(esk2_0,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),esk5_0,intersection_point(esk2_0,parallel_through_point(esk3_0,esk6_0)))
    & ~ apart_point_and_line(esk5_0,esk3_0)
    & convergent_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0)
    & convergent_lines(esk1_0,esk3_0)
    & ~ apart_point_and_line(esk5_0,esk2_0)
    & convergent_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0)
    & between_on_line(esk1_0,esk4_0,esk5_0,esk6_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2))
    | ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2)
    | left_convergent_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2))
    | left_convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ~ left_convergent_lines(X1,X2),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
    | unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    convergent_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
    | unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2)
    | ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    unequally_directed_lines(esk2_0,reverse_line(esk3_0)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    unequally_directed_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : GEO262+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v6.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.39  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.39  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.39  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.39  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.39  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.39  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.39  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.39  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 14:49:52 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.39  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.39  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.43  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.43  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
% 0.09/0.48  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.48  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % new_bool_1 with pid 380554 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.09/0.48  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.09/0.48  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.09/0.48  % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.48  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % SubtermCWHack with pid 380556 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.48  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.09/0.48  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.09/0.48  % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.48  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.48  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.48  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.48  
% 0.09/0.48  % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.48  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.48  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.48  % Parsed axioms                        : 32
% 0.09/0.48  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 6
% 0.09/0.48  % Initial clauses                      : 54
% 0.09/0.48  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 54
% 0.09/0.48  % Processed clauses                    : 121
% 0.09/0.48  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % ...subsumed                          : 33
% 0.09/0.48  % ...remaining for further processing  : 88
% 0.09/0.48  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Backward-subsumed                    : 8
% 0.09/0.48  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Generated clauses                    : 301
% 0.09/0.48  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 225
% 0.09/0.48  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Paramodulations                      : 271
% 0.09/0.48  % Factorizations                       : 30
% 0.09/0.48  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Total rewrite steps                  : 57
% 0.09/0.48  % ...of those cached                   : 45
% 0.09/0.48  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.09/0.48  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.09/0.48  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.09/0.48  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.09/0.48  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.09/0.48  % Current number of processed clauses  : 80
% 0.09/0.48  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 20
% 0.09/0.48  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.48  %    Negative unit clauses             : 7
% 0.09/0.48  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 53
% 0.09/0.48  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 150
% 0.09/0.48  % ...number of literals in the above   : 554
% 0.09/0.48  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Current number of archived clauses   : 8
% 0.09/0.48  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1194
% 0.09/0.48  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 771
% 0.09/0.48  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 26
% 0.09/0.48  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 167
% 0.09/0.48  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.09/0.48  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 6338
% 0.09/0.48  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 685
% 0.09/0.48  
% 0.09/0.48  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.48  % User time                : 0.013 s
% 0.09/0.48  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.09/0.48  % Total time               : 0.014 s
% 0.09/0.48  % Maximum resident set size: 3624 pages
% 0.09/0.48  
% 0.09/0.48  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.48  % User time                : 0.015 s
% 0.09/0.48  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.09/0.48  % Total time               : 0.020 s
% 0.09/0.48  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.09/0.48  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------