%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SWV250-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n024.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 : 300s % DateTime : Mon Jun 24 16:46:17 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.66s 0.75s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.66s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SWV250-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.07/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n024.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 : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Jun 20 14:01:54 EDT 2024 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.66/0.74 %------------------------------------------- % 0.66/0.74 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.66/0.74 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.66/0.74 % Transform :cnf % 0.66/0.74 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.66/0.74 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.66/0.74 % 0.66/0.74 % Result :Theorem 0.150000s % 0.66/0.74 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.150000s % 0.66/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.66/0.75 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.66/0.75 % File : SWV250-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.66/0.75 % Domain : Software Verification (Security) % 0.66/0.75 % Problem : Cryptographic protocol problem for messages % 0.66/0.75 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial. % 0.66/0.75 % English : % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.66/0.75 % Source : [Pau06] % 0.66/0.75 % Names : % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.66/0.75 % Rating : 0.10 v8.1.0, 0.00 v7.5.0, 0.05 v7.4.0, 0.06 v7.3.0, 0.08 v7.1.0, 0.00 v7.0.0, 0.13 v6.4.0, 0.07 v6.3.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.15 v5.3.0, 0.17 v5.2.0, 0.06 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.1.0, 0.00 v4.0.1, 0.09 v4.0.0, 0.00 v3.4.0, 0.08 v3.3.0, 0.14 v3.2.0 % 0.66/0.75 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 7 ( 4 unt; 1 nHn; 3 RR) % 0.66/0.75 % Number of literals : 11 ( 2 equ; 4 neg) % 0.66/0.75 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.66/0.75 % Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg) % 0.66/0.75 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty) % 0.66/0.75 % Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty) % 0.66/0.75 % Number of variables : 16 ( 2 sgn) % 0.66/0.75 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_NHN % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms, % 0.66/0.75 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation. % 0.66/0.75 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation % 0.66/0.75 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary % 0.66/0.75 % axioms. % 0.66/0.75 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture, % 0.66/0.75 c_in(v_x,c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture, % 0.66/0.75 ~ c_in(v_x,c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_Message_Omsg) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_Message_Oanalz__analz__Un_0,axiom, % 0.66/0.75 c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(V_G),V_H,tc_Message_Omsg)) = c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(V_G,V_H,tc_Message_Omsg)) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_Message_Oanalz__synth__Un_0,axiom, % 0.66/0.75 c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Osynth(V_G),V_H,tc_Message_Omsg)) = c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(V_G,V_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Osynth(V_G),tc_Message_Omsg) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_Set_OUn__iff_0,axiom, % 0.66/0.75 ( ~ c_in(V_c,c_union(V_A,V_B,T_a),T_a) % 0.66/0.75 | c_in(V_c,V_B,T_a) % 0.66/0.75 | c_in(V_c,V_A,T_a) ) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_Set_OUn__iff_1,axiom, % 0.66/0.75 ( ~ c_in(V_c,V_A,T_a) % 0.66/0.75 | c_in(V_c,c_union(V_A,V_B,T_a),T_a) ) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 cnf(cls_Set_OUn__iff_2,axiom, % 0.66/0.75 ( ~ c_in(V_c,V_B,T_a) % 0.66/0.75 | c_in(V_c,c_union(V_A,V_B,T_a),T_a) ) ). % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.66/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.66/0.75 % Proof found % 0.66/0.75 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.66/0.75 % SZS output start Proof % 0.66/0.75 %ClaNum:18(EqnAxiom:11) % 0.66/0.75 %VarNum:36(SingletonVarNum:16) % 0.66/0.75 %MaxLitNum:3 % 0.66/0.75 %MaxfuncDepth:4 % 0.66/0.75 %SharedTerms:13 % 0.66/0.75 %goalClause: 13 15 % 0.66/0.75 %singleGoalClaCount:2 % 0.66/0.75 [15]~P1(a5,f3(f4(f1(a6)),f1(f3(a6,a7,a2)),a2),a2) % 0.66/0.75 [13]P1(a5,f1(f3(f4(f1(a6)),a7,a2)),a2) % 0.66/0.75 [12]E(f1(f3(f1(x121),x122,a2)),f1(f3(x121,x122,a2))) % 0.66/0.75 [14]E(f3(f1(f3(x141,x142,a2)),f4(x141),a2),f1(f3(f4(x141),x142,a2))) % 0.66/0.75 [16]~P1(x161,x163,x164)+P1(x161,f3(x162,x163,x164),x164) % 0.66/0.75 [17]~P1(x171,x172,x174)+P1(x171,f3(x172,x173,x174),x174) % 0.66/0.75 [18]P1(x181,x182,x183)+P1(x181,x184,x183)+~P1(x181,f3(x184,x182,x183),x183) % 0.66/0.75 %EqnAxiom % 0.66/0.75 [1]E(x11,x11) % 0.66/0.75 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22) % 0.66/0.75 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33) % 0.66/0.75 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f1(x41),f1(x42)) % 0.66/0.75 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x51,x53,x54),f3(x52,x53,x54)) % 0.66/0.75 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f3(x63,x61,x64),f3(x63,x62,x64)) % 0.66/0.75 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f3(x73,x74,x71),f3(x73,x74,x72)) % 0.66/0.75 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f4(x81),f4(x82)) % 0.66/0.75 [9]P1(x92,x93,x94)+~E(x91,x92)+~P1(x91,x93,x94) % 0.66/0.75 [10]P1(x103,x102,x104)+~E(x101,x102)+~P1(x103,x101,x104) % 0.66/0.75 [11]P1(x113,x114,x112)+~E(x111,x112)+~P1(x113,x114,x111) % 0.66/0.75 % 0.66/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.66/0.75 cnf(19,plain, % 0.66/0.75 (~P1(a5,f1(f3(a6,a7,a2)),a2)), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,16])). % 0.66/0.75 cnf(21,plain, % 0.66/0.75 (~P1(a5,f4(f1(a6)),a2)), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,16,17])). % 0.66/0.75 cnf(23,plain, % 0.66/0.75 (E(f1(f3(x231,x232,a2)),f1(f3(f1(x231),x232,a2)))), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,12,16,17,2])). % 0.66/0.75 cnf(29,plain, % 0.66/0.75 (E(f1(f3(f4(x291),x292,a2)),f3(f1(f3(x291,x292,a2)),f4(x291),a2))), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[14,2])). % 0.66/0.75 cnf(103,plain, % 0.66/0.75 (~P1(a5,f1(f3(f1(a6),a7,a2)),a2)), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,19,2,10])). % 0.66/0.75 cnf(104,plain, % 0.66/0.75 (P1(a5,f3(f1(f3(f1(a6),a7,a2)),f4(f1(a6)),a2),a2)), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,29,10])). % 0.66/0.75 cnf(107,plain, % 0.66/0.75 ($false), % 0.66/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,104,103,18]), % 0.66/0.75 ['proof']). % 0.66/0.75 % SZS output end Proof % 0.66/0.75 % Total time :0.150000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------