TSTP Solution File: SWW967+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWW967+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n027.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 00:11:46 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 1.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 12
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 42 ( 13 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 110 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 9 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 125 ( 57 ~; 54 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 7 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 20 ( 20 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 75 ( 32 sgn 32 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(ax171,axiom,
! [X207,X208,X209,X210,X211] :
( ( pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(tuple_succ(name_Na0x27(X210,X209,X207)),constr_cbc_dec_1(X211,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30_bitstring(constr_cbc_dec_2(X208,name_Kas))))
& pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X211))
& pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_cbc_dec_2(X208,name_Kas)))
& pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X208))
& pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X210))
& pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_B,constr_tuple_4_get_1(constr_cbc_dec_4(X209,name_Kas)))
& pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Na(X207),constr_tuple_4_get_0x30(constr_cbc_dec_4(X209,name_Kas)))
& pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X209)) )
=> pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax171) ).
fof(ax83,axiom,
! [X63,X64] : pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(X63,X64),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax83) ).
fof(ax120,axiom,
! [X117] :
( pred_attacker(X117)
=> pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X117)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax120) ).
fof(ax122,axiom,
! [X119] :
( pred_attacker(X119)
=> pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X119)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax122) ).
fof(ax124,axiom,
! [X121] :
( pred_attacker(X121)
=> pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X121)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax124) ).
fof(ax126,axiom,
! [X123] :
( pred_attacker(X123)
=> pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X123)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax126) ).
fof(ax119,axiom,
! [X114,X115,X116] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_1(X114,X115,X116))
=> pred_attacker(X116) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax119) ).
fof(ax167,axiom,
! [X197] : pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_1(name_A,name_B,name_Na(X197))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax167) ).
fof(co0,conjecture,
pred_attacker(name_objective),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',co0) ).
fof(ax109,axiom,
! [X98] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(X98))
=> pred_attacker(X98) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',ax109) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X212,X213,X214,X215,X216] :
( ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(tuple_succ(name_Na0x27(X215,X214,X212)),constr_cbc_dec_1(X216,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30_bitstring(constr_cbc_dec_2(X213,name_Kas))))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X216))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_cbc_dec_2(X213,name_Kas)))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X213))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X215))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_B,constr_tuple_4_get_1(constr_cbc_dec_4(X214,name_Kas)))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Na(X212),constr_tuple_4_get_0x30(constr_cbc_dec_4(X214,name_Kas)))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X214))
| pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective)) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax171])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X65,X66] : pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(X65,X66),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax83]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X1))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_Na(X2),constr_tuple_4_get_0x30(constr_cbc_dec_4(X1,name_Kas)))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_B,constr_tuple_4_get_1(constr_cbc_dec_4(X1,name_Kas)))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X3))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X4))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(name_A,constr_tuple_2_get_1(constr_cbc_dec_2(X4,name_Kas)))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X5))
| ~ pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(tuple_succ(name_Na0x27(X3,X1,X2)),constr_cbc_dec_1(X5,constr_tuple_2_get_0x30_bitstring(constr_cbc_dec_2(X4,name_Kas)))) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
pred_eq_bitstring_bitstring(X1,X2),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X118] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X118)
| pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X118)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax120])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X5))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X4))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X3))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X1)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_13]),c_0_13]),c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_8(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
fof(c_0_17,plain,
! [X120] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X120)
| pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X120)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax122])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X2))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X3))
| ~ pred_attacker(X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_6(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
fof(c_0_20,plain,
! [X122] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X122)
| pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X122)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax124])]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X2))
| ~ pred_attacker(X3)
| ~ pred_attacker(X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_4(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]) ).
fof(c_0_23,plain,
! [X124] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X124)
| pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X124)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax126])]) ).
fof(c_0_24,plain,
! [X117,X118,X119] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_1(X117,X118,X119))
| pred_attacker(X119) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax119])]) ).
fof(c_0_25,plain,
! [X198] : pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_1(name_A,name_B,name_Na(X198))),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax167]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(X2)
| ~ pred_attacker(X3)
| ~ pred_attacker(X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_in_2(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_1(X2,X3,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_1(name_A,name_B,name_Na(X1))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X2)
| ~ pred_attacker(X3)
| ~ pred_attacker(X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
pred_attacker(name_Na(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X2)
| ~ pred_attacker(X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_31]) ).
fof(c_0_34,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co0]) ).
fof(c_0_35,plain,
! [X99] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(X99))
| pred_attacker(X99) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax109])]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,plain,
( pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_31]) ).
fof(c_0_37,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_34]) ).
cnf(c_0_38,plain,
( pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_35]) ).
cnf(c_0_39,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_client_A_out_9(name_objective)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_36,c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_40,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_37]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_38,c_0_39]),c_0_40]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SWW967+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.4.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n027.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 02:43:52 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.26/1.43 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.43 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.26/1.43 # Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% 0.26/1.43
% 0.26/1.43 # Failure: Out of unprocessed clauses!
% 0.26/1.43 # OLD status GaveUp
% 0.26/1.43 # Parsed axioms : 175
% 0.26/1.43 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 99
% 0.26/1.43 # Initial clauses : 76
% 0.26/1.43 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Initial clauses in saturation : 76
% 0.26/1.43 # Processed clauses : 76
% 0.26/1.43 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # ...remaining for further processing : 76
% 0.26/1.43 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Generated clauses : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of processed clauses : 76
% 0.26/1.43 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.26/1.43 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Negative unit clauses : 67
% 0.26/1.43 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.43 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.26/1.43 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1774
% 0.26/1.43
% 0.26/1.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.43 # User time : 0.016 s
% 0.26/1.43 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/1.43 # Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.26/1.43 # Maximum resident set size: 3044 pages
% 0.26/1.43 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_f171197f65f27d1ba69648a20c844832c84a5dd7 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.43 # Preprocessing time : 0.021 s
% 0.26/1.43
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof found!
% 0.26/1.43 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/1.43 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object total steps : 42
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object clause steps : 21
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object formula steps : 21
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object conjectures : 4
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object clause conjectures : 1
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object initial clauses used : 10
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object initial formulas used : 10
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object generating inferences : 10
% 0.26/1.43 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 6
% 0.26/1.43 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.43 # Parsed axioms : 175
% 0.26/1.43 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Initial clauses : 175
% 0.26/1.43 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.26/1.43 # Initial clauses in saturation : 174
% 0.26/1.43 # Processed clauses : 191
% 0.26/1.43 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # ...subsumed : 5
% 0.26/1.43 # ...remaining for further processing : 186
% 0.26/1.43 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Backward-subsumed : 7
% 0.26/1.43 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.26/1.43 # Generated clauses : 304
% 0.26/1.43 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 270
% 0.26/1.43 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Paramodulations : 304
% 0.26/1.43 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of processed clauses : 178
% 0.26/1.43 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 33
% 0.26/1.43 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Negative unit clauses : 67
% 0.26/1.43 # Non-unit-clauses : 78
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 22
% 0.26/1.43 # ...number of literals in the above : 54
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.26/1.43 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5297
% 0.26/1.43 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3234
% 0.26/1.43 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 12
% 0.26/1.43 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1350
% 0.26/1.43 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.26/1.43 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.26/1.43 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/1.43 # Termbank termtop insertions : 10943
% 0.26/1.43
% 0.26/1.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.43 # User time : 0.027 s
% 0.26/1.43 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.26/1.43 # Total time : 0.030 s
% 0.26/1.43 # Maximum resident set size: 3852 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------