TSTP Solution File: SWW965+1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : SWW965+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n025.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 01:27:46 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 3.74s 3.98s
% Output : Refutation 3.74s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : SWW965+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.4.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Jun 6 08:20:48 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.12/0.36 The process was started by sandbox on n025.cluster.edu,
% 0.12/0.36 Mon Jun 6 08:20:48 2022
% 0.12/0.36 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 9485.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.12/0.36 set(auto).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.12/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 formula_list(usable).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=7.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 This ia a non-Horn set with equality. The strategy will be
% 0.12/0.36 Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.12/0.36 unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.12/0.36 clauses in usable.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.12/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 271 during input processing: 0 [copy,271,flip.1] {-} constr_xor(A,B)=constr_xor(B,A).
% 0.12/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 305 during input processing: 0 [copy,305,flip.1] {-} A=A.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 Failed to model usable list: disabling FINDER
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.18/0.43 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.18/0.43 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.18/0.43 number of clauses in intial UL: 166
% 0.18/0.43 number of clauses initially in problem: 212
% 0.18/0.43 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 78
% 0.18/0.43 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 79
% 0.18/0.43 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.18/0.43 absolute distinct symbol count: 67
% 0.18/0.43 distinct predicate count: 11
% 0.18/0.43 distinct function count: 40
% 0.18/0.43 distinct constant count: 16
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 =========== start of search ===========
% 0.18/0.49
% 0.18/0.49
% 0.18/0.49 Changing weight limit from 60 to 6.
% 0.18/0.49
% 0.18/0.49 Resetting weight limit to 6 after 30 givens.
% 0.18/0.49
% 0.35/0.56
% 0.35/0.56
% 0.35/0.56 Changing weight limit from 6 to 5.
% 0.35/0.56
% 0.35/0.56 Resetting weight limit to 5 after 35 givens.
% 0.35/0.56
% 0.96/1.19
% 0.96/1.19
% 0.96/1.19 Changing weight limit from 5 to 4.
% 0.96/1.19
% 0.96/1.19 Resetting weight limit to 4 after 130 givens.
% 0.96/1.19
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 -------- PROOF --------
% 3.74/3.98 % SZS status Theorem
% 3.74/3.98 % SZS output start Refutation
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 2.85 sec ----> 40319 [binary,40318.1,245.1] {-} $F.
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 Length of proof is 5. Level of proof is 3.
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 3.74/3.98 % SZS status Theorem
% 3.74/3.98 % SZS output start Refutation
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 208 [] {+} -pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(A))|pred_attacker(A).
% 3.74/3.98 214 [] {+} -pred_attacker(A)|pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(A)).
% 3.74/3.98 216 [] {+} -pred_attacker(A)|pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(A)).
% 3.74/3.98 218 [] {+} -pred_attacker(A)|pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(A)).
% 3.74/3.98 242 [] {+} -pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Nb(A),constr_adec(B,name_skB))| -pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(B))| -pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_adec(C,name_skB)))| -pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(C))| -pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30(constr_checksign(D,constr_pkey(name_skS))))| -pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(D))|pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective)).
% 3.74/3.98 245 [] {+} -pred_attacker(name_objective).
% 3.74/3.98 283 [] {-} pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(A,B).
% 3.74/3.98 284 [] {-} pred_attacker(tuple_true).
% 3.74/3.98 333 [hyper,284,218] {-} pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_2(tuple_true)).
% 3.74/3.98 334 [hyper,284,216] {-} pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_3(tuple_true)).
% 3.74/3.98 335 [hyper,284,214] {-} pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_in_5(tuple_true)).
% 3.74/3.98 5375 [hyper,335,242,283,283,334,283,333] {-} pred_attacker(tuple_client_B_out_6(name_objective)).
% 3.74/3.98 40318 [hyper,5375,208] {-} pred_attacker(name_objective).
% 3.74/3.98 40319 [binary,40318.1,245.1] {-} $F.
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 % SZS output end Refutation
% 3.74/3.98 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 ============ end of search ============
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 3.74/3.98
% 3.74/3.98 Process 9485 finished Mon Jun 6 08:20:51 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------