%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO272+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 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 12:28:04 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 2.40s 1.13s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.40s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 92 ( 31 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 114 ( 45 ~; 37 |; 29 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 18 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 0 sgn 14 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))',axiom,
! [X13,X14,X15,X16,X17] :
( ( ? [X19] :
( rpoint(X19)
& X13 = X19 )
& ? [X18] :
( rpoint(X18)
& X14 = X18 )
& rcenter(X15,X16)
& rcenter(X15,X17)
& ron(X13,X16)
& ron(X14,X17)
& vf(X15,X13) = vf(X15,X14) )
=> X16 = X17 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))') ).
fof('qu(theu(the(212), 1), imp(the(212)))',conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ( rcircle(X1)
& rcenter(vd1057,X1)
& ron(vd1055,X1) )
=> X1 = vd1063 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','qu(theu(the(212), 1), imp(the(212)))') ).
fof('and(pred(conjunct2(210), 4), and(holds(conjunct2(210), 1059, 0), and(pred(conjunct2(210), 1), and(pred(conjunct1(210), 2), pred(conjunct1(210), 1)))))',axiom,
( rpoint(vd1056)
& vd1055 = vd1056
& rpoint(vd1058)
& vd1055 != vd1057
& vd1057 = vd1058 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','and(pred(conjunct2(210), 4), and(holds(conjunct2(210), 1059, 0), and(pred(conjunct2(210), 1), and(pred(conjunct1(210), 2), pred(conjunct1(210), 1)))))') ).
fof('and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(212)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(212)), 0), pred(the(212), 0)))',axiom,
( rcircle(vd1063)
& rcenter(vd1057,vd1063)
& ron(vd1055,vd1063) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(212)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(212)), 0), pred(the(212), 0)))') ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X741,X742,X743,X744,X745,X746,X747] :
( X744 = X745
| ~ rpoint(X747)
| X741 != X747
| ~ rpoint(X746)
| X742 != X746
| ~ rcenter(X743,X744)
| ~ rcenter(X743,X745)
| ~ ron(X741,X744)
| ~ ron(X742,X745)
| vf(X743,X741) != vf(X743,X742) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))'])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ( rcircle(X1)
& rcenter(vd1057,X1)
& ron(vd1055,X1) )
=> X1 = vd1063 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['qu(theu(the(212), 1), imp(the(212)))']) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ rpoint(X7)
| X2 != X7
| ~ rpoint(X6)
| X3 != X6
| ~ rcenter(X1,X5)
| ~ rcenter(X1,X4)
| ~ ron(X2,X5)
| ~ ron(X3,X4)
| vf(X1,X2) != vf(X1,X3)
| X5 = X4 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 != vd1063
& rcircle(esk1_0)
& rcenter(vd1057,esk1_0)
& ron(vd1055,esk1_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_8,plain,
( ~ ron(X4,X2)
| ~ ron(X5,X1)
| ~ rcenter(X3,X1)
| ~ rcenter(X3,X2)
| ~ rpoint(X5)
| ~ rpoint(X4)
| vf(X3,X4) != vf(X3,X5)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
rcenter(vd1057,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
( rpoint(vd1056)
& vd1055 = vd1056
& rpoint(vd1058)
& vd1055 != vd1057
& vd1057 = vd1058 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],['and(pred(conjunct2(210), 4), and(holds(conjunct2(210), 1059, 0), and(pred(conjunct2(210), 1), and(pred(conjunct1(210), 2), pred(conjunct1(210), 1)))))']) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ron(X3,X1)
| ~ ron(X2,esk1_0)
| ~ rcenter(vd1057,X1)
| ~ rpoint(X3)
| ~ rpoint(X2)
| vf(vd1057,X2) != vf(vd1057,X3)
| X1 = esk1_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
rcenter(vd1057,vd1063),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(212)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(212)), 0), pred(the(212), 0)))']) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != vd1063,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
( rpoint(vd1056)
& vd1055 = vd1056
& rpoint(vd1058)
& vd1055 != vd1057
& vd1057 = vd1058 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ron(X2,vd1063)
| ~ ron(X1,esk1_0)
| ~ rpoint(X2)
| ~ rpoint(X1)
| vf(vd1057,X1) != vf(vd1057,X2) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
rpoint(vd1056),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
vd1055 = vd1056,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ron(X1,vd1063)
| ~ ron(X1,esk1_0)
| ~ rpoint(X1) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
ron(vd1055,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
rpoint(vd1055),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
ron(vd1055,vd1063),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(212)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(212)), 0), pred(the(212), 0)))']) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]),c_0_21])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : GEO272+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.43 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 15:02:20 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.50 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
% 2.40/1.13 % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.40/1.13 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 2.40/1.13 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 3081133 completed with status 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 2.40/1.13 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 2.40/1.13 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.40/1.13 % No SInE strategy applied
% 2.40/1.13 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM33-SFFFFFNN
% 2.40/1.13 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 136s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with pid 3081140 completed with status 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y
% 2.40/1.13 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 2.40/1.13 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.40/1.13 % No SInE strategy applied
% 2.40/1.13 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM33-SFFFFFNN
% 2.40/1.13 % Scheduled 11 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 2.40/1.13 % Preprocessing time : 0.030 s
% 2.40/1.13
% 2.40/1.13 % Proof found!
% 2.40/1.13 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.40/1.13 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.40/1.13 % Parsed axioms : 108
% 2.40/1.13 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Initial clauses : 265
% 2.40/1.13 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 2.40/1.13 % Initial clauses in saturation : 263
% 2.40/1.13 % Processed clauses : 499
% 2.40/1.13 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % ...subsumed : 35
% 2.40/1.13 % ...remaining for further processing : 464
% 2.40/1.13 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1088
% 2.40/1.13 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 2.40/1.13 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 2.40/1.13 % Generated clauses : 628
% 2.40/1.13 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 590
% 2.40/1.13 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 25
% 2.40/1.13 % Paramodulations : 383
% 2.40/1.13 % Factorizations : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % NegExts : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Equation resolutions : 1101
% 2.40/1.13 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Total rewrite steps : 187
% 2.40/1.13 % ...of those cached : 166
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional check models : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 2.40/1.13 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 2.40/1.13 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 2.40/1.13 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 2.40/1.13 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 2.40/1.13 % Current number of processed clauses : 228
% 2.40/1.13 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 26
% 2.40/1.13 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 2.40/1.13 % Non-unit-clauses : 194
% 2.40/1.13 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 318
% 2.40/1.13 % ...number of literals in the above : 3177
% 2.40/1.13 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 2.40/1.13 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 44138
% 2.40/1.13 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3193
% 2.40/1.13 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 55
% 2.40/1.13 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 206
% 2.40/1.13 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 2.40/1.13 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 2.40/1.13 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Condensation successes : 0
% 2.40/1.13 % Termbank termtop insertions : 69259
% 2.40/1.13 % Search garbage collected termcells : 13758
% 2.40/1.13
% 2.40/1.13 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.40/1.13 % User time : 0.219 s
% 2.40/1.13 % System time : 0.012 s
% 2.40/1.13 % Total time : 0.231 s
% 2.40/1.13 % Maximum resident set size: 5680 pages
% 2.40/1.13
% 2.40/1.13 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.40/1.13 % User time : 0.999 s
% 2.40/1.13 % System time : 0.050 s
% 2.40/1.13 % Total time : 1.049 s
% 2.40/1.13 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 2.40/1.13 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------