↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : GEO275+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n020.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 0.23s 0.57s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   22 (   9 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   81 (  24 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   10 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  101 (  42   ~;  37   |;  19   &)
%                                         (   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    :    6 (   6 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   35 (   0 sgn  14   !;   3   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))',axiom,
    ! [X608,X609,X610,X611,X612] :
      ( ( ? [X614] :
            ( rpoint(X614)
            & X608 = X614 )
        & ? [X613] :
            ( rpoint(X613)
            & X609 = X613 )
        & rcenter(X610,X611)
        & rcenter(X610,X612)
        & ron(X608,X611)
        & ron(X609,X612)
        & vf(X610,X608) = vf(X610,X609) )
     => X611 = X612 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))') ).

fof('qu(theu(the(228), 1), imp(the(228)))',conjecture,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ( rcircle(X1)
        & rcenter(vd1080,X1)
        & ron(vd1081,X1) )
     => X1 = vd1095 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','qu(theu(the(228), 1), imp(the(228)))') ).

fof('and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(228)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(228)), 0), pred(the(228), 0)))',axiom,
    ( rcircle(vd1095)
    & rcenter(vd1080,vd1095)
    & ron(vd1081,vd1095) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(228)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(228)), 0), pred(the(228), 0)))') ).

fof('qe(s2(plural(224)))',axiom,
    ? [X2] :
      ( rpoint(X2)
      & vd1081 = X2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','qe(s2(plural(224)))') ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X1350,X1351,X1352,X1353,X1354,X1355,X1356] :
      ( X1353 = X1354
      | ~ rpoint(X1356)
      | X1350 != X1356
      | ~ rpoint(X1355)
      | X1351 != X1355
      | ~ rcenter(X1352,X1353)
      | ~ rcenter(X1352,X1354)
      | ~ ron(X1350,X1353)
      | ~ ron(X1351,X1354)
      | vf(X1352,X1350) != vf(X1352,X1351) ),
    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(vd1080,X1)
          & ron(vd1081,X1) )
       => X1 = vd1095 ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['qu(theu(the(228), 1), imp(the(228)))']) ).

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 != vd1095
    & rcircle(esk1_0)
    & rcenter(vd1080,esk1_0)
    & ron(vd1081,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(vd1080,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ ron(X3,X1)
    | ~ ron(X2,esk1_0)
    | ~ rcenter(vd1080,X1)
    | ~ rpoint(X3)
    | ~ rpoint(X2)
    | vf(vd1080,X2) != vf(vd1080,X3)
    | X1 = esk1_0 ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    rcenter(vd1080,vd1095),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(228)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(228)), 0), pred(the(228), 0)))']) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    esk1_0 != vd1095,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

fof(c_0_13,plain,
    ( rpoint(esk2_0)
    & vd1081 = esk2_0 ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['qe(s2(plural(224)))'])]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ ron(X2,vd1095)
    | ~ ron(X1,esk1_0)
    | ~ rpoint(X2)
    | ~ rpoint(X1)
    | vf(vd1080,X1) != vf(vd1080,X2) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    rpoint(esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    vd1081 = esk2_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ ron(X1,vd1095)
    | ~ ron(X1,esk1_0)
    | ~ rpoint(X1) ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    ron(vd1081,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    rpoint(vd1081),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ron(vd1081,vd1095),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(228)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(228)), 0), pred(the(228), 0)))']) ).

cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]),c_0_20])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : GEO275+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35  % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.35  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 15:01:32 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.35  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.39  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40  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
% 0.23/0.57  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/0.57  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.57  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 696980 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.23/0.57  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.57  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.57  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.57  % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.57  % Scheduled 11 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 136s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with pid 696986 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y
% 0.23/0.57  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.57  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.57  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.57  % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.57  % Scheduled 11 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.57  % Preprocessing time       : 0.010 s
% 0.23/0.57  
% 0.23/0.57  % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.57  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.57  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.57  % Parsed axioms                        : 120
% 0.23/0.57  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Initial clauses                      : 275
% 0.23/0.57  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.23/0.57  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 273
% 0.23/0.57  % Processed clauses                    : 534
% 0.23/0.57  % ...of these trivial                  : 6
% 0.23/0.57  % ...subsumed                          : 40
% 0.23/0.57  % ...remaining for further processing  : 488
% 0.23/0.57  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1094
% 0.23/0.57  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.23/0.57  % Backward-rewritten                   : 9
% 0.23/0.57  % Generated clauses                    : 817
% 0.23/0.57  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 796
% 0.23/0.57  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 21
% 0.23/0.57  % Paramodulations                      : 569
% 0.23/0.57  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Equation resolutions                 : 1107
% 0.23/0.57  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Total rewrite steps                  : 280
% 0.23/0.57  % ...of those cached                   : 257
% 0.23/0.57  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57  % Current number of processed clauses  : 242
% 0.23/0.57  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 30
% 0.23/0.57  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.57  %    Negative unit clauses             : 10
% 0.23/0.57  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 202
% 0.23/0.57  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 521
% 0.23/0.57  % ...number of literals in the above   : 5291
% 0.23/0.57  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Current number of archived clauses   : 11
% 0.23/0.57  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 38253
% 0.23/0.57  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2547
% 0.23/0.57  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 49
% 0.23/0.57  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 214
% 0.23/0.57  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.23/0.57  % BW rewrite match successes           : 4
% 0.23/0.57  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.23/0.57  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 76278
% 0.23/0.57  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 13882
% 0.23/0.57  
% 0.23/0.57  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.57  % User time                : 0.078 s
% 0.23/0.57  % System time              : 0.010 s
% 0.23/0.57  % Total time               : 0.088 s
% 0.23/0.57  % Maximum resident set size: 5740 pages
% 0.23/0.57  
% 0.23/0.57  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.57  % User time                : 0.503 s
% 0.23/0.57  % System time              : 0.038 s
% 0.23/0.57  % Total time               : 0.541 s
% 0.23/0.57  % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.23/0.57  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------