TSTP Solution File: ITP088^1 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : ITP088^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v7.5.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Mon May 20 22:16:15 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 1.86s 0.88s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 1.86s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :   24
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   43 (  18 unt;  17 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   46 (   6 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  166 (  26   ~;  15   |;   0   &; 120   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   11 (   5 avg)
%            Number of types       :    6 (   5 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   10 (  10   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :   14 (  12 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   22 (   0   ^  22   !;   0   ?;  22   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
    secrecy_specID: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort2,type,
    secrecy_KS: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort3,type,
    set_Secrecy_specID: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort4,type,
    secrecy_Expression: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort5,type,
    secrecy_Keys: $tType ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    knowle945212990e_know: secrecy_specID > secrecy_KS > $o ).

thf(decl_40,type,
    bot_bo1785112429specID: set_Secrecy_specID ).

thf(decl_46,type,
    ine: secrecy_specID > secrecy_Expression > $o ).

thf(decl_58,type,
    secrecy_kE: secrecy_Keys > secrecy_Expression ).

thf(decl_61,type,
    secrecy_kKS: secrecy_Keys > secrecy_KS ).

thf(decl_72,type,
    insert1671894227specID: secrecy_specID > set_Secrecy_specID > set_Secrecy_specID ).

thf(decl_80,type,
    correctCompositionIn: secrecy_specID > $o ).

thf(decl_89,type,
    subcomponents: secrecy_specID > set_Secrecy_specID ).

thf(decl_95,type,
    p: secrecy_specID ).

thf(decl_96,type,
    pq: secrecy_specID ).

thf(decl_97,type,
    q: secrecy_specID ).

thf(decl_98,type,
    key: secrecy_Keys ).

thf(fact_2_assms_I1_J,axiom,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ p @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_2_assms_I1_J) ).

thf(fact_5_not__know__k__not__ine,axiom,
    ! [X3: secrecy_specID,X4: secrecy_Keys] :
      ( ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ X3 @ ( secrecy_kKS @ X4 ) )
     => ~ ( ine @ X3 @ ( secrecy_kE @ X4 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_5_not__know__k__not__ine) ).

thf(fact_1_assms_I2_J,axiom,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ q @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_1_assms_I2_J) ).

thf(fact_35_TBtheorem1a,axiom,
    ! [X22: secrecy_specID,X9: secrecy_Expression,X7: secrecy_specID,X12: secrecy_specID] :
      ( ( ine @ X22 @ X9 )
     => ( ( ( subcomponents @ X22 )
          = ( insert1671894227specID @ X7 @ ( insert1671894227specID @ X12 @ bot_bo1785112429specID ) ) )
       => ( ( correctCompositionIn @ X22 )
         => ( ( ine @ X7 @ X9 )
            | ( ine @ X12 @ X9 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_35_TBtheorem1a) ).

thf(fact_3_assms_I3_J,axiom,
    ( ( subcomponents @ pq )
    = ( insert1671894227specID @ p @ ( insert1671894227specID @ q @ bot_bo1785112429specID ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_3_assms_I3_J) ).

thf(conj_0,conjecture,
    ~ ( ine @ pq @ ( secrecy_kE @ key ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_0) ).

thf(fact_0_assms_I4_J,axiom,
    correctCompositionIn @ pq,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_0_assms_I4_J) ).

thf(c_0_7,plain,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ p @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_2_assms_I1_J]) ).

thf(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X3: secrecy_specID,X4: secrecy_Keys] :
      ( ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ X3 @ ( secrecy_kKS @ X4 ) )
     => ~ ( ine @ X3 @ ( secrecy_kE @ X4 ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_5_not__know__k__not__ine]) ).

thf(c_0_9,plain,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ q @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_1_assms_I2_J]) ).

thf(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X1488: secrecy_specID,X1489: secrecy_Expression,X1490: secrecy_specID,X1491: secrecy_specID] :
      ( ~ ( ine @ X1488 @ X1489 )
      | ( ( subcomponents @ X1488 )
       != ( insert1671894227specID @ X1490 @ ( insert1671894227specID @ X1491 @ bot_bo1785112429specID ) ) )
      | ~ ( correctCompositionIn @ X1488 )
      | ( ine @ X1490 @ X1489 )
      | ( ine @ X1491 @ X1489 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_35_TBtheorem1a])])]) ).

thf(c_0_11,plain,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ p @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

thf(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X1457: secrecy_specID,X1458: secrecy_Keys] :
      ( ( knowle945212990e_know @ X1457 @ ( secrecy_kKS @ X1458 ) )
      | ~ ( ine @ X1457 @ ( secrecy_kE @ X1458 ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])]) ).

thf(c_0_13,plain,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ q @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

thf(c_0_14,plain,
    ! [X9: secrecy_Expression,X7: secrecy_specID,X5: secrecy_specID,X3: secrecy_specID] :
      ( ( ine @ X5 @ X9 )
      | ( ine @ X7 @ X9 )
      | ~ ( ine @ X3 @ X9 )
      | ( ( subcomponents @ X3 )
       != ( insert1671894227specID @ X5 @ ( insert1671894227specID @ X7 @ bot_bo1785112429specID ) ) )
      | ~ ( correctCompositionIn @ X3 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

thf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ( subcomponents @ pq )
    = ( insert1671894227specID @ p @ ( insert1671894227specID @ q @ bot_bo1785112429specID ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[fact_3_assms_I3_J]) ).

thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ine @ pq @ ( secrecy_kE @ key ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_0])]) ).

thf(c_0_17,plain,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ p @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

thf(c_0_18,plain,
    ! [X3: secrecy_specID,X1: secrecy_Keys] :
      ( ( knowle945212990e_know @ X3 @ ( secrecy_kKS @ X1 ) )
      | ~ ( ine @ X3 @ ( secrecy_kE @ X1 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

thf(c_0_19,plain,
    ~ ( knowle945212990e_know @ q @ ( secrecy_kKS @ key ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

thf(c_0_20,plain,
    ! [X9: secrecy_Expression,X3: secrecy_specID] :
      ( ( ine @ p @ X9 )
      | ( ine @ q @ X9 )
      | ( ( subcomponents @ X3 )
       != ( subcomponents @ pq ) )
      | ~ ( ine @ X3 @ X9 )
      | ~ ( correctCompositionIn @ X3 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

thf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    ine @ pq @ ( secrecy_kE @ key ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).

thf(c_0_22,plain,
    correctCompositionIn @ pq,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[fact_0_assms_I4_J]) ).

thf(c_0_23,plain,
    ~ ( ine @ p @ ( secrecy_kE @ key ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).

thf(c_0_24,plain,
    ~ ( ine @ q @ ( secrecy_kE @ key ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_18]) ).

thf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),c_0_23]),c_0_24]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.14  % Problem    : ITP088^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v7.5.0.
% 0.14/0.15  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.15/0.36  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.15/0.37  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.15/0.37  % DateTime   : Sat May 18 17:04:53 EDT 2024
% 0.15/0.37  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.23/0.51  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.51  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover-ho --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
% 1.86/0.88  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 1.86/0.88  # Preprocessing class: HSLSSMSMSSMNSFA.
% 1.86/0.88  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_ho_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting pre_casc_2 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting additional_ho_7 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting lpo8_s with 300s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # new_ho_3 with pid 32601 completed with status 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Result found by new_ho_3
% 1.86/0.88  # Preprocessing class: HSLSSMSMSSMNSFA.
% 1.86/0.88  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_ho_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 1.86/0.88  # Search class: HGHSM-FSLS32-SSFFFFBN
% 1.86/0.88  # partial match(1): HGHSM-FSLM32-SSFFFFBN
% 1.86/0.88  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_bool_3 with 811s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_ho_3 with 151s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_bool_4 with 136s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting sh9 with 136s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # new_ho_3 with pid 32609 completed with status 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Result found by new_ho_3
% 1.86/0.88  # Preprocessing class: HSLSSMSMSSMNSFA.
% 1.86/0.88  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_ho_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 1.86/0.88  # Search class: HGHSM-FSLS32-SSFFFFBN
% 1.86/0.88  # partial match(1): HGHSM-FSLM32-SSFFFFBN
% 1.86/0.88  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_bool_3 with 811s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Starting new_ho_3 with 151s (1) cores
% 1.86/0.88  # Preprocessing time       : 0.011 s
% 1.86/0.88  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 1.86/0.88  
% 1.86/0.88  # Proof found!
% 1.86/0.88  # SZS status Theorem
% 1.86/0.88  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.86/0.88  # Parsed axioms                        : 446
% 1.86/0.88  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 143
% 1.86/0.88  # Initial clauses                      : 625
% 1.86/0.88  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 27
% 1.86/0.88  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 598
% 1.86/0.88  # Processed clauses                    : 2908
% 1.86/0.88  # ...of these trivial                  : 71
% 1.86/0.88  # ...subsumed                          : 1616
% 1.86/0.88  # ...remaining for further processing  : 1221
% 1.86/0.88  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 237
% 1.86/0.88  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Backward-subsumed                    : 11
% 1.86/0.88  # Backward-rewritten                   : 17
% 1.86/0.88  # Generated clauses                    : 9578
% 1.86/0.88  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8543
% 1.86/0.88  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 24
% 1.86/0.88  # Paramodulations                      : 9356
% 1.86/0.88  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # NegExts                              : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Equation resolutions                 : 258
% 1.86/0.88  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Total rewrite steps                  : 3146
% 1.86/0.88  # ...of those cached                   : 2675
% 1.86/0.88  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 1.86/0.88  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 1.86/0.88  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 1.86/0.88  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 1.86/0.88  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 1.86/0.88  # Current number of processed clauses  : 740
% 1.86/0.88  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 74
% 1.86/0.88  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 9
% 1.86/0.88  #    Negative unit clauses             : 21
% 1.86/0.88  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 636
% 1.86/0.88  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 6567
% 1.86/0.88  # ...number of literals in the above   : 24254
% 1.86/0.88  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # Current number of archived clauses   : 399
% 1.86/0.88  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 184192
% 1.86/0.88  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 65566
% 1.86/0.88  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1393
% 1.86/0.88  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1219
% 1.86/0.88  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 1.86/0.88  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 178
% 1.86/0.88  # BW rewrite match successes           : 128
% 1.86/0.88  # Condensation attempts                : 2908
% 1.86/0.88  # Condensation successes               : 6
% 1.86/0.88  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 181605
% 1.86/0.88  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 16453
% 1.86/0.88  
% 1.86/0.88  # -------------------------------------------------
% 1.86/0.88  # User time                : 0.296 s
% 1.86/0.88  # System time              : 0.017 s
% 1.86/0.88  # Total time               : 0.313 s
% 1.86/0.88  # Maximum resident set size: 5308 pages
% 1.86/0.88  
% 1.86/0.88  # -------------------------------------------------
% 1.86/0.88  # User time                : 1.340 s
% 1.86/0.88  # System time              : 0.055 s
% 1.86/0.88  # Total time               : 1.395 s
% 1.86/0.88  # Maximum resident set size: 2616 pages
% 1.86/0.88  % E---3.1 exiting
% 1.86/0.88  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------