TSTP Solution File: SWW959+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SWW959+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n021.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  : 600s
% DateTime : Thu Jul 21 00:11:45 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.25s 1.43s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   10
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   33 (  12 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   78 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   83 (  38   ~;  35   |;   5   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   15 (  15 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   48 (  19 sgn  22   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(ax165,axiom,
    ! [X107,X108,X109,X110] :
      ( ( pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Nb(X107),constr_adec(X109,name_skB))
        & pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X109))
        & pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_adec(X108,name_skB)))
        & pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X108))
        & pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30(constr_checksign(X110,constr_pkey(name_skS))))
        & pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X110)) )
     => pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax165) ).

fof(ax86,axiom,
    ! [X17,X18] : pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(X17,X18),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax86) ).

fof(ax119,axiom,
    ! [X61] :
      ( pred_attacker(X61)
     => pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X61)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax119) ).

fof(ax121,axiom,
    ! [X63] :
      ( pred_attacker(X63)
     => pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X63)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax121) ).

fof(ax123,axiom,
    ! [X65] :
      ( pred_attacker(X65)
     => pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X65)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax123) ).

fof(ax154,axiom,
    ! [X98] : pred_attacker(name_new0x2Dname(X98)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax154) ).

fof(co0,conjecture,
    pred_attacker(name_objective),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',co0) ).

fof(ax113,axiom,
    ! [X52] :
      ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(X52))
     => pred_attacker(X52) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax113) ).

fof(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X111,X112,X113,X114] :
      ( ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Nb(X111),constr_adec(X113,name_skB))
      | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X113))
      | ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_adec(X112,name_skB)))
      | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X112))
      | ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30(constr_checksign(X114,constr_pkey(name_skS))))
      | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X114))
      | pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective)) ),
    inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax165])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X19,X20] : pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(X19,X20),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax86]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X1))
    | ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30(constr_checksign(X1,constr_pkey(name_skS))))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X2))
    | ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_adec(X2,name_skB)))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X3))
    | ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Nb(X4),constr_adec(X3,name_skB)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(X1,X2),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X62] :
      ( ~ pred_attacker(X62)
      | pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X62)) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax119])]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X3))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X2))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X1)) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_11]),c_0_11])]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(X1))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

fof(c_0_15,plain,
    ! [X64] :
      ( ~ pred_attacker(X64)
      | pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X64)) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax121])]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X1))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X2))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(X1))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).

fof(c_0_18,plain,
    ! [X66] :
      ( ~ pred_attacker(X66)
      | pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X66)) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax123])]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X1))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X2)
    | ~ pred_attacker(X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(X1))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).

fof(c_0_21,plain,
    ! [X99] : pred_attacker(name_new0x2Dname(X99)),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax154]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X1)
    | ~ pred_attacker(X2)
    | ~ pred_attacker(X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    pred_attacker(name_new0x2Dname(X1)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X1)
    | ~ pred_attacker(X2) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).

fof(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co0]) ).

fof(c_0_26,plain,
    ! [X53] :
      ( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(X53))
      | pred_attacker(X53) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax113])]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective))
    | ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_23]) ).

fof(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_25]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,plain,
    ( pred_attacker(X1)
    | ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_26]) ).

cnf(c_0_30,plain,
    pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_28]) ).

cnf(c_0_32,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]),c_0_31]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : SWW959+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.4.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime : Sun Jun  5 15:28:19 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.25/1.43  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.43  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.43  # Preprocessing time       : 0.017 s
% 0.25/1.43  
% 0.25/1.43  # Failure: Out of unprocessed clauses!
% 0.25/1.43  # OLD status GaveUp
% 0.25/1.43  # Parsed axioms                        : 169
% 0.25/1.43  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 81
% 0.25/1.43  # Initial clauses                      : 88
% 0.25/1.43  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 88
% 0.25/1.43  # Processed clauses                    : 88
% 0.25/1.43  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # ...remaining for further processing  : 88
% 0.25/1.43  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of processed clauses  : 88
% 0.25/1.43  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 9
% 0.25/1.43  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.43  #    Negative unit clauses             : 79
% 0.25/1.43  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.43  # ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.25/1.43  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 1630
% 0.25/1.43  
% 0.25/1.43  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.43  # User time                : 0.015 s
% 0.25/1.43  # System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.25/1.43  # Total time               : 0.018 s
% 0.25/1.43  # Maximum resident set size: 2972 pages
% 0.25/1.43  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_f171197f65f27d1ba69648a20c844832c84a5dd7 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.43  # Preprocessing time       : 0.020 s
% 0.25/1.43  
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.43  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.43  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object total steps             : 33
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object clause steps            : 16
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object formula steps           : 17
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object conjectures             : 4
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 8
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 8
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object generating inferences   : 7
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 5
% 0.25/1.43  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.43  # Parsed axioms                        : 169
% 0.25/1.43  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Initial clauses                      : 169
% 0.25/1.43  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 168
% 0.25/1.43  # Processed clauses                    : 180
% 0.25/1.43  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # ...subsumed                          : 2
% 0.25/1.43  # ...remaining for further processing  : 178
% 0.25/1.43  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Backward-subsumed                    : 5
% 0.25/1.43  # Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # Generated clauses                    : 212
% 0.25/1.43  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 182
% 0.25/1.43  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Paramodulations                      : 212
% 0.25/1.43  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of processed clauses  : 172
% 0.25/1.43  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 32
% 0.25/1.43  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.43  #    Negative unit clauses             : 79
% 0.25/1.43  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 61
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.25/1.43  # ...number of literals in the above   : 41
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of archived clauses   : 7
% 0.25/1.43  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2623
% 0.25/1.43  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2471
% 0.25/1.43  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 7
% 0.25/1.43  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1132
% 0.25/1.43  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 7792
% 0.25/1.43  
% 0.25/1.43  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.43  # User time                : 0.023 s
% 0.25/1.43  # System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.25/1.43  # Total time               : 0.027 s
% 0.25/1.43  # Maximum resident set size: 3456 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------