TSTP Solution File: SWV261-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : SWV261-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n004.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 : Thu Aug 31 21:32:32 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.61s 1.79s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.63s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.13 % Problem : SWV261-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 05:10:22 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.61/1.79 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.79 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.61/1.79 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.61/1.79 % Transform :cnf
% 0.61/1.79 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.61/1.79 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 % Result :Theorem 0.030000s
% 0.61/1.79 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.030000s
% 0.61/1.79 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.79 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.79 % File : SWV261-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.61/1.79 % Domain : Software Verification (Security)
% 0.61/1.79 % Problem : Cryptographic protocol problem for messages
% 0.61/1.79 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.61/1.79 % English :
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.61/1.79 % Source : [Pau06]
% 0.61/1.79 % Names :
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.61/1.79 % Rating : 0.24 v8.1.0, 0.16 v7.5.0, 0.21 v7.4.0, 0.18 v7.3.0, 0.25 v7.1.0, 0.17 v7.0.0, 0.20 v6.3.0, 0.18 v6.2.0, 0.10 v6.1.0, 0.21 v6.0.0, 0.20 v5.4.0, 0.25 v5.3.0, 0.28 v5.2.0, 0.19 v5.1.0, 0.18 v5.0.0, 0.14 v4.1.0, 0.23 v4.0.1, 0.36 v4.0.0, 0.18 v3.7.0, 0.20 v3.5.0, 0.18 v3.4.0, 0.25 v3.3.0, 0.36 v3.2.0
% 0.61/1.79 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 10 ( 3 unt; 2 nHn; 6 RR)
% 0.61/1.79 % Number of literals : 19 ( 1 equ; 8 neg)
% 0.61/1.79 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.61/1.79 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.61/1.79 % Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty)
% 0.61/1.79 % Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% 0.61/1.79 % Number of variables : 26 ( 2 sgn)
% 0.61/1.79 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_NHN
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 0.61/1.79 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 0.61/1.79 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 0.61/1.79 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 0.61/1.79 % axioms.
% 0.61/1.79 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 0.61/1.79 c_in(v_X,v_G,tc_Message_Omsg) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
% 0.61/1.79 ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oparts(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_G),c_Message_Oparts(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Message_Oparts__Un__subset2_0,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 c_lessequals(c_Message_Oparts(c_union(V_G,V_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_union(c_Message_Oparts(V_G),c_Message_Oparts(V_H),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Message_Oparts__mono_0,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( ~ c_lessequals(V_G,V_H,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))
% 0.61/1.79 | c_lessequals(c_Message_Oparts(V_G),c_Message_Oparts(V_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Set_OUnCI_0,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( ~ c_in(V_c,V_B,T_a)
% 0.61/1.79 | c_in(V_c,c_union(V_A,V_B,T_a),T_a) ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Set_OUnCI_1,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( ~ c_in(V_c,V_A,T_a)
% 0.61/1.79 | c_in(V_c,c_union(V_A,V_B,T_a),T_a) ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Set_OinsertE_0,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( ~ c_in(V_a,c_insert(V_b,V_A,T_a),T_a)
% 0.61/1.79 | c_in(V_a,V_A,T_a)
% 0.61/1.79 | V_a = V_b ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Set_OsubsetI_0,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(V_A,V_B,T_a),V_A,T_a)
% 0.61/1.79 | c_lessequals(V_A,V_B,tc_set(T_a)) ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Set_OsubsetI_1,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( ~ c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(V_A,V_B,T_a),V_B,T_a)
% 0.61/1.79 | c_lessequals(V_A,V_B,tc_set(T_a)) ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 cnf(cls_Set_Osubset__trans_0,axiom,
% 0.61/1.79 ( ~ c_lessequals(V_B,V_C,tc_set(T_a))
% 0.61/1.79 | ~ c_lessequals(V_A,V_B,tc_set(T_a))
% 0.61/1.79 | c_lessequals(V_A,V_C,tc_set(T_a)) ) ).
% 0.61/1.79
% 0.61/1.79 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.79 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.79 % Proof found
% 0.61/1.79 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.61/1.79 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.61/1.79 %ClaNum:30(EqnAxiom:20)
% 0.61/1.79 %VarNum:59(SingletonVarNum:26)
% 0.61/1.79 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.61/1.79 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 0.61/1.79 %SharedTerms:12
% 0.61/1.79 %goalClause: 21 23
% 0.61/1.79 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.61/1.79 [21]P1(a1,a2,a3)
% 0.61/1.79 [23]~P2(f5(f7(a1,a9,a3)),f4(f5(a2),f5(a9),a3),f8(a3))
% 0.61/1.79 [22]P2(f5(f4(x221,x222,a3)),f4(f5(x221),f5(x222),a3),f8(a3))
% 0.61/1.79 [24]~P2(x241,x242,f8(a3))+P2(f5(x241),f5(x242),f8(a3))
% 0.61/1.79 [25]P1(f6(x251,x252,x253),x251,x253)+P2(x251,x252,f8(x253))
% 0.61/1.79 [30]~P1(f6(x301,x302,x303),x302,x303)+P2(x301,x302,f8(x303))
% 0.61/1.79 [26]~P1(x261,x263,x264)+P1(x261,f4(x262,x263,x264),x264)
% 0.61/1.79 [27]~P1(x271,x272,x274)+P1(x271,f4(x272,x273,x274),x274)
% 0.61/1.79 [28]P2(x281,x282,f8(x283))+~P2(x284,x282,f8(x283))+~P2(x281,x284,f8(x283))
% 0.61/1.79 [29]E(x291,x292)+P1(x291,x293,x294)+~P1(x291,f7(x292,x293,x294),x294)
% 0.61/1.79 %EqnAxiom
% 0.61/1.79 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.61/1.79 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.61/1.79 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.61/1.79 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f4(x41,x43,x44),f4(x42,x43,x44))
% 0.61/1.79 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f4(x53,x51,x54),f4(x53,x52,x54))
% 0.61/1.80 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x63,x64,x61),f4(x63,x64,x62))
% 0.61/1.80 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f5(x71),f5(x72))
% 0.61/1.80 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f8(x81),f8(x82))
% 0.61/1.80 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f6(x91,x93,x94),f6(x92,x93,x94))
% 0.61/1.80 [10]~E(x101,x102)+E(f6(x103,x101,x104),f6(x103,x102,x104))
% 0.61/1.80 [11]~E(x111,x112)+E(f6(x113,x114,x111),f6(x113,x114,x112))
% 0.61/1.80 [12]~E(x121,x122)+E(f7(x121,x123,x124),f7(x122,x123,x124))
% 0.61/1.80 [13]~E(x131,x132)+E(f7(x133,x131,x134),f7(x133,x132,x134))
% 0.61/1.80 [14]~E(x141,x142)+E(f7(x143,x144,x141),f7(x143,x144,x142))
% 0.61/1.80 [15]P1(x152,x153,x154)+~E(x151,x152)+~P1(x151,x153,x154)
% 0.61/1.80 [16]P1(x163,x162,x164)+~E(x161,x162)+~P1(x163,x161,x164)
% 0.61/1.80 [17]P1(x173,x174,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P1(x173,x174,x171)
% 0.61/1.80 [18]P2(x182,x183,x184)+~E(x181,x182)+~P2(x181,x183,x184)
% 0.61/1.80 [19]P2(x193,x192,x194)+~E(x191,x192)+~P2(x193,x191,x194)
% 0.61/1.80 [20]P2(x203,x204,x202)+~E(x201,x202)+~P2(x203,x204,x201)
% 0.61/1.80
% 0.61/1.80 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.61/1.80 cnf(32,plain,
% 0.61/1.80 (P2(f5(f4(x321,x322,a3)),f4(f5(x321),f5(x322),a3),f8(a3))),
% 0.61/1.80 inference(rename_variables,[],[22])).
% 0.61/1.80 cnf(37,plain,
% 0.61/1.80 (P1(a1,f4(a2,x371,a3),a3)),
% 0.61/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,23,22,32,18,28,2,27])).
% 0.61/1.80 cnf(39,plain,
% 0.61/1.80 (P1(a1,f4(x391,a2,a3),a3)),
% 0.61/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,23,22,32,18,28,2,27,26])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(42,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (~E(f4(a2,a9,a3),f7(a1,a9,a3))),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,23,22,32,18,28,2,27,26,20,7])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(45,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (~P1(f6(f7(a1,a9,a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3)),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,23,22,32,18,28,2,27,26,20,7,24,30])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(47,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (P1(f6(f7(a1,a9,a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3),f7(a1,a9,a3),a3)),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,23,22,32,18,28,2,27,26,20,7,24,30,25])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(53,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (~E(a1,f6(f7(a1,a9,a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3))),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[45,47,37,16,15])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(55,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (~P1(f6(f7(a1,a9,a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3),a2,a3)),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[45,47,37,16,15,27])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(59,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (E(f6(f7(a1,a9,a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3),a1)),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[45,47,37,16,15,27,26,29])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(65,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 (E(f7(f6(f7(a1,a9,a3),f4(a2,a9,a3),a3),x651,x652),f7(a1,x651,x652))),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,45,47,37,16,15,27,26,29,7,19,2,14,13,12])).
% 0.63/1.80 cnf(92,plain,
% 0.63/1.80 ($false),
% 0.63/1.80 inference(scs_inference,[],[65,59,42,53,55,39,47,27,26,16,3,2]),
% 0.63/1.80 ['proof']).
% 0.63/1.80 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.63/1.80 % Total time :0.030000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------