%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV237+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Sep 24 02:54:01 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 29 ( 16 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 59 ( 6 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 58 ( 28 ~; 24 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 39 ( 4 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(encrypt_a_stored_comms_key,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( p(X3)
& p(X2)
& p(X1) )
=> p(enc(enc(i(tmk),X2),enc(i(tc),X1))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',encrypt_a_stored_comms_key) ).
fof(intruder_knows_8,axiom,
p(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',intruder_knows_8) ).
fof(dec_enc_cancel,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : enc(X1,enc(i(X1),X2)) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dec_enc_cancel) ).
fof(double_inverse_cancel,axiom,
! [X1] : i(i(X1)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',double_inverse_cancel) ).
fof(encrypt_clear_key_as_Tcomms_key,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( p(X3)
& p(X2)
& p(X1) )
=> p(enc(tc,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',encrypt_clear_key_as_Tcomms_key) ).
fof(co1,conjecture,
p(enc(pp,a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
fof(intruder_knows_1,axiom,
p(enc(tmk,pp)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',intruder_knows_1) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X19,X20,X21] :
( p(enc(enc(i(tmk),X20),enc(i(tc),X19)))
| ~ p(X21)
| ~ p(X20)
| ~ p(X19) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[encrypt_a_stored_comms_key])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ p(X3)
| ~ p(X2)
| ~ p(X1)
| p(enc(enc(i(tmk),X2),enc(i(tc),X1))) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
p(a),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[intruder_knows_8]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X10,X11] : enc(X10,enc(i(X10),X11)) = X11,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[dec_enc_cancel]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X12] : i(i(X12)) = X12,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[double_inverse_cancel]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X28,X29,X30] :
( p(enc(tc,X28))
| ~ p(X30)
| ~ p(X29)
| ~ p(X28) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[encrypt_clear_key_as_Tcomms_key])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ p(X2)
| ~ p(X1)
| p(enc(enc(i(tmk),X1),enc(i(tc),X2))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
enc(X1,enc(i(X1),X2)) = X2,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
i(i(X1)) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ p(X3)
| ~ p(X2)
| ~ p(X1)
| p(enc(tc,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
fof(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ p(enc(pp,a)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ p(X1)
| ~ p(enc(tc,X2))
| p(enc(enc(i(tmk),X1),X2)) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ p(X1)
| ~ p(X2)
| p(enc(tc,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ p(enc(pp,a)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ p(enc(tmk,X1))
| ~ p(enc(tc,X2))
| p(enc(X1,X2)) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_14]),c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ p(X1)
| p(enc(tc,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
~ p(enc(pp,a)),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ p(X2)
| ~ p(enc(tmk,X1))
| p(enc(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
p(enc(tmk,pp)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[intruder_knows_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
~ p(enc(pp,a)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( ~ p(X1)
| p(enc(pp,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV237+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:35:55 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.40 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % new_bool_1 with pid 494158 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.42 % Search class: FHUSS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 494162 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.42 % Search class: FHUSS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 25
% 0.14/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 9
% 0.14/0.42 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.14/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.14/0.42 % Processed clauses : 181
% 0.14/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.14/0.42 % ...subsumed : 99
% 0.14/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 81
% 0.14/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 14
% 0.14/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Generated clauses : 374
% 0.14/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 325
% 0.14/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.14/0.42 % Paramodulations : 374
% 0.14/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 55
% 0.14/0.42 % ...of those cached : 40
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 67
% 0.14/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.14/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 55
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 103
% 0.14/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 435
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 14
% 0.14/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2089
% 0.14/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1594
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 91
% 0.14/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 37
% 0.14/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 7046
% 0.14/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 247
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3656 pages
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------