%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SWV268-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n032.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 16:46:23 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.47s 0.58s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.50s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.02/0.09 % Problem : SWV268-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.02/0.09 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.09/0.28 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu % 0.09/0.28 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.09/0.28 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.09/0.28 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.09/0.28 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.09/0.28 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.09/0.28 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.09/0.28 % DateTime : Thu Jun 20 21:22:08 EDT 2024 % 0.09/0.28 % CPUTime : % 0.14/0.46 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.47/0.58 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.47/0.58 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.47/0.58 % Transform :cnf % 0.47/0.58 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.47/0.58 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 % Result :Theorem 0.080000s % 0.47/0.58 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.080000s % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.47/0.58 % File : SWV268-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.47/0.58 % Domain : Software Verification (Security) % 0.47/0.58 % Problem : Cryptographic protocol problem for messages % 0.47/0.58 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial. % 0.47/0.58 % English : % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.47/0.58 % Source : [Pau06] % 0.47/0.58 % Names : % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.47/0.58 % Rating : 0.00 v4.1.0, 0.11 v4.0.1, 0.17 v3.3.0, 0.14 v3.2.0 % 0.47/0.58 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 4 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 3 RR) % 0.47/0.58 % Number of literals : 5 ( 1 equ; 2 neg) % 0.47/0.58 % Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.47/0.58 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg) % 0.47/0.58 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty) % 0.47/0.58 % Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty) % 0.47/0.58 % Number of variables : 3 ( 0 sgn) % 0.47/0.58 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_HRN % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms, % 0.47/0.58 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation. % 0.47/0.58 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation % 0.47/0.58 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary % 0.47/0.58 % axioms. % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.47/0.58 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture, % 0.47/0.58 c_lessequals(v_G,c_Message_Oparts(v_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ). % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture, % 0.47/0.58 ~ c_lessequals(c_Message_Oparts(v_G),c_Message_Oparts(v_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ). % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 cnf(cls_Message_Oparts__idem_0,axiom, % 0.47/0.58 c_Message_Oparts(c_Message_Oparts(V_H)) = c_Message_Oparts(V_H) ). % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 cnf(cls_Message_Oparts__mono_0,axiom, % 0.47/0.58 ( ~ c_lessequals(V_G,V_H,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) % 0.47/0.58 | c_lessequals(c_Message_Oparts(V_G),c_Message_Oparts(V_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) ) ). % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.47/0.58 % Proof found % 0.47/0.58 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.47/0.58 % SZS output start Proof % 0.47/0.58 %ClaNum:12(EqnAxiom:8) % 0.47/0.58 %VarNum:6(SingletonVarNum:3) % 0.47/0.58 %MaxLitNum:2 % 0.47/0.58 %MaxfuncDepth:2 % 0.47/0.58 %SharedTerms:8 % 0.47/0.58 %goalClause: 10 11 % 0.47/0.58 %singleGoalClaCount:2 % 0.47/0.58 [10]P1(a2,f1(a5),f4(a3)) % 0.47/0.58 [11]~P1(f1(a2),f1(a5),f4(a3)) % 0.47/0.58 [9]E(f1(f1(x91)),f1(x91)) % 0.47/0.58 [12]~P1(x121,x122,f4(a3))+P1(f1(x121),f1(x122),f4(a3)) % 0.47/0.58 %EqnAxiom % 0.47/0.58 [1]E(x11,x11) % 0.47/0.58 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22) % 0.47/0.58 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33) % 0.47/0.58 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f1(x41),f1(x42)) % 0.47/0.58 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f4(x51),f4(x52)) % 0.47/0.58 [6]P1(x62,x63,x64)+~E(x61,x62)+~P1(x61,x63,x64) % 0.47/0.58 [7]P1(x73,x72,x74)+~E(x71,x72)+~P1(x73,x71,x74) % 0.47/0.58 [8]P1(x83,x84,x82)+~E(x81,x82)+~P1(x83,x84,x81) % 0.47/0.58 % 0.47/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.58 cnf(15,plain, % 0.50/0.58 (E(f1(x151),f1(f1(x151)))), % 0.50/0.58 inference(scs_inference,[],[11,9,12,2])). % 0.50/0.58 cnf(20,plain, % 0.50/0.58 (P1(a2,f1(a5),x201)+~E(f4(a3),x201)), % 0.50/0.58 inference(scs_inference,[],[10,11,9,12,2,6,3,7,8])). % 0.50/0.58 cnf(26,plain, % 0.50/0.58 (~P1(f1(f1(a2)),f1(a5),f4(a3))), % 0.50/0.58 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,11,2,6])). % 0.50/0.58 cnf(58,plain, % 0.50/0.58 (P1(f1(a2),f1(f1(a5)),f4(a3))), % 0.50/0.58 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,12])). % 0.50/0.58 cnf(59,plain, % 0.50/0.58 (P1(f1(f1(a2)),f1(f1(a5)),f4(a3))), % 0.50/0.58 inference(scs_inference,[],[58,15,6])). % 0.50/0.58 cnf(64,plain, % 0.50/0.58 ($false), % 0.50/0.58 inference(scs_inference,[],[26,59,9,7]), % 0.50/0.58 ['proof']). % 0.50/0.58 % SZS output end Proof % 0.50/0.58 % Total time :0.080000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------