TSTP Solution File: SWV311-2 by Gandalf---c-2.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Gandalf---c-2.6
% Problem : SWV311-2 : TPTP v3.4.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : add_equality:r
% Format : otter:hypothesis:set(auto),clear(print_given)
% Command : gandalf-wrapper -time %d %s
% Computer : art07.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2794MHz
% Memory : 1003MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4
% CPULimit : 600s
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.0s
% Output : Assurance 0.0s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----NO SOLUTION OUTPUT BY SYSTEM
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
%
% Gandalf c-2.6 r1 starting to prove: /tmp/SystemOnTPTP3327/SWV/SWV311-2+eq_r.in
% Using automatic strategy selection.
% Time limit in seconds: 600
%
% prove-all-passes started
%
% detected problem class: neq
% detected subclass: medium
%
% strategies selected:
% (hyper 25 #f 11 7)
% (binary-unit 9 #f 11 7)
% (binary-double 9 #f 11 7)
% (binary-double 15 #f)
% (binary-double 15 #t)
% (binary 50 #t 11 7)
% (binary-order 25 #f 11 7)
% (binary-posweight-order 101 #f)
% (binary-posweight-lex-big-order 25 #f)
% (binary-posweight-lex-small-order 9 #f)
% (binary-order-sos 50 #t)
% (binary-unit-uniteq 25 #f)
% (binary-weightorder 50 #f)
% (binary-order 50 #f)
% (hyper-order 30 #f)
% (binary 112 #t)
%
%
% ********* EMPTY CLAUSE DERIVED *********
%
%
% timer checkpoints: c(13,40,0,26,0,0,49,50,0,62,0,0,489,50,5,502,0,5,929,50,11,942,0,11,1369,50,17,1382,0,17,1809,50,23,1822,0,23,2249,50,29,2262,0,29,2689,50,37,2702,0,37,3129,50,45,3142,0,45,3569,50,57,3582,0,57,4009,50,62,4022,0,62,4449,50,71,4449,40,71,4462,0,71)
%
%
% START OF PROOF
% 4087 [?] ?
% 4454 [] c_in(c_^event_^oevent_^o^says(X,c_^message_^oagent_^o^server,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(Y,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(Z),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(X),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(v_sko__u__1(Z,X,Y,U,V),c_^message_^omsg_^o^crypt(c_^public_^oshr^k(X),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(Y,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(U,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(Z),c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(X)))))))))),c_^list_^oset(V,tc_^event_^oevent),tc_^event_^oevent) | -c_in(c_^message_^omsg_^o^crypt(c_^public_^oshr^k(X),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(Y,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(U,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(Z),c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(X))))),c_^message_^oparts(c_^event_^oknows(c_^message_^oagent_^o^spy,V)),tc_^message_^omsg) | -c_in(V,c_^otway^rees_^ootway,tc_^list_^olist(tc_^event_^oevent)) | c_in(X,c_^event_^obad,tc_^message_^oagent).
% 4456 [] -c_in(v_^b,c_^event_^obad,tc_^message_^oagent).
% 4457 [] c_in(v_evs3,c_^otway^rees_^ootway,tc_^list_^olist(tc_^event_^oevent)).
% 4459 [] -c_in(c_^event_^oevent_^o^says(v_^ba,c_^message_^oagent_^o^server,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^nonce(v_^n^aa),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(v_^aa),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(v_^ba),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(X,c_^message_^omsg_^o^crypt(c_^public_^oshr^k(v_^ba),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^nonce(v_^n^aa),c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(v_^n^b,c_^message_^omsg_^o^m^pair(c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(v_^aa),c_^message_^omsg_^o^agent(v_^ba)))))))))),c_^list_^oset(v_evs3,tc_^event_^oevent),tc_^event_^oevent).
% 4461 [] equal(v_^b,v_^ba).
% 4462 [] equal(v_^n^a,c_^message_^omsg_^o^nonce(v_^n^aa)).
% 4492 [binary:4459,4454,demod:4462,cut:4087,cut:4457] c_in(v_^ba,c_^event_^obad,tc_^message_^oagent).
% 4493 [para:4461.1.2,4492.1.1,cut:4456] contradiction
% END OF PROOF
%
% Proof found by the following strategy:
%
% using binary resolution
% not using sos strategy
% using unit strategy
% using dynamic demodulation
% using ordered paramodulation
% using kb ordering for equality
% preferring bigger arities for lex ordering
% using clause demodulation
% clause length limited to 7
% clause depth limited to 11
% seconds given: 9
%
%
% ***GANDALF_FOUND_A_REFUTATION***
%
% Global statistics over all passes:
%
% given clauses: 4284
% derived clauses: 21425
% kept clauses: 4140
% kept size sum: 242047
% kept mid-nuclei: 22
% kept new demods: 36
% forw unit-subs: 16965
% forw double-subs: 100
% forw overdouble-subs: 0
% backward subs: 0
% fast unit cutoff: 212
% full unit cutoff: 0
% dbl unit cutoff: 0
% real runtime : 0.73
% process. runtime: 0.71
% specific non-discr-tree subsumption statistics:
% tried: 13
% length fails: 0
% strength fails: 13
% predlist fails: 0
% aux str. fails: 0
% by-lit fails: 0
% full subs tried: 0
% full subs fail: 0
%
% ; program args: ("/home/graph/tptp/Systems/Gandalf---c-2.6/gandalf" "-time" "600" "/tmp/SystemOnTPTP3327/SWV/SWV311-2+eq_r.in")
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------