%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SWV274-2 : 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 : n026.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 16:46:26 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.57s 0.78s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.57s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.12/0.13 % Problem : SWV274-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Jun 20 18:32:53 EDT 2024 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.54/0.59 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.57/0.77 %------------------------------------------- % 0.57/0.77 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.57/0.77 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.57/0.77 % Transform :cnf % 0.57/0.77 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.57/0.77 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.57/0.77 % 0.57/0.77 % Result :Theorem 0.020000s % 0.57/0.77 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.020000s % 0.57/0.77 %------------------------------------------- % 0.57/0.78 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.57/0.78 % File : SWV274-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.57/0.78 % Domain : Software Verification (Security) % 0.57/0.78 % Problem : Cryptographic protocol problem for messages % 0.57/0.78 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial. % 0.57/0.78 % English : % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.57/0.78 % Source : [Pau06] % 0.57/0.78 % Names : % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.57/0.78 % 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, 0.07 v6.4.0, 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.07 v6.0.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.10 v5.4.0, 0.15 v5.3.0, 0.11 v5.2.0, 0.06 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.1.0, 0.15 v4.0.1, 0.09 v4.0.0, 0.00 v3.3.0, 0.21 v3.2.0 % 0.57/0.78 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 8 ( 3 unt; 2 nHn; 7 RR) % 0.57/0.78 % Number of literals : 15 ( 1 equ; 6 neg) % 0.57/0.78 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.57/0.78 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.57/0.78 % Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty) % 0.57/0.78 % Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty) % 0.57/0.78 % Number of variables : 15 ( 0 sgn) % 0.57/0.78 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_NHN % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms, % 0.57/0.78 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation. % 0.57/0.78 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation % 0.57/0.78 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary % 0.57/0.78 % axioms. % 0.57/0.78 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_Message_Osynth_OInj_0,axiom, % 0.57/0.78 ( ~ c_in(V_X,V_H,tc_Message_Omsg) % 0.57/0.78 | c_in(V_X,c_Message_Osynth(V_H),tc_Message_Omsg) ) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_Message_Osynth__trans_0,axiom, % 0.57/0.78 ( ~ c_in(V_X,c_Message_Osynth(V_G),tc_Message_Omsg) % 0.57/0.78 | ~ c_lessequals(V_G,c_Message_Osynth(V_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)) % 0.57/0.78 | c_in(V_X,c_Message_Osynth(V_H),tc_Message_Omsg) ) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_Set_OinsertE_0,axiom, % 0.57/0.78 ( ~ c_in(V_a,c_insert(V_b,V_A,T_a),T_a) % 0.57/0.78 | c_in(V_a,V_A,T_a) % 0.57/0.78 | V_a = V_b ) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_Set_OsubsetI_0,axiom, % 0.57/0.78 ( c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(V_A,V_B,T_a),V_A,T_a) % 0.57/0.78 | c_lessequals(V_A,V_B,tc_set(T_a)) ) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_Set_OsubsetI_1,axiom, % 0.57/0.78 ( ~ c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(V_A,V_B,T_a),V_B,T_a) % 0.57/0.78 | c_lessequals(V_A,V_B,tc_set(T_a)) ) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture, % 0.57/0.78 c_in(v_Y,c_Message_Osynth(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture, % 0.57/0.78 c_in(v_X,c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture, % 0.57/0.78 ~ c_in(v_Y,c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg) ). % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.57/0.78 %------------------------------------------- % 0.57/0.78 % Proof found % 0.57/0.78 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.57/0.78 % SZS output start Proof % 0.57/0.78 %ClaNum:25(EqnAxiom:17) % 0.57/0.78 %VarNum:36(SingletonVarNum:15) % 0.57/0.78 %MaxLitNum:3 % 0.57/0.78 %MaxfuncDepth:2 % 0.57/0.78 %SharedTerms:11 % 0.57/0.78 %goalClause: 18 19 20 % 0.57/0.78 %singleGoalClaCount:3 % 0.57/0.78 [18]P1(a1,f3(a2),a5) % 0.57/0.78 [20]~P1(a8,f3(a2),a5) % 0.57/0.78 [19]P1(a8,f3(f6(a1,a2,a5)),a5) % 0.57/0.78 [21]~P1(x211,x212,a5)+P1(x211,f3(x212),a5) % 0.57/0.78 [22]P1(f4(x221,x222,x223),x221,x223)+P2(x221,x222,f7(x223)) % 0.57/0.78 [25]~P1(f4(x251,x252,x253),x252,x253)+P2(x251,x252,f7(x253)) % 0.57/0.78 [23]~P2(x233,f3(x232),f7(a5))+P1(x231,f3(x232),a5)+~P1(x231,f3(x233),a5) % 0.57/0.78 [24]E(x241,x242)+P1(x241,x243,x244)+~P1(x241,f6(x242,x243,x244),x244) % 0.57/0.78 %EqnAxiom % 0.57/0.78 [1]E(x11,x11) % 0.57/0.78 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22) % 0.57/0.78 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33) % 0.57/0.78 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f3(x41),f3(x42)) % 0.57/0.78 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f6(x51,x53,x54),f6(x52,x53,x54)) % 0.57/0.78 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f6(x63,x61,x64),f6(x63,x62,x64)) % 0.57/0.78 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f6(x73,x74,x71),f6(x73,x74,x72)) % 0.57/0.78 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f4(x81,x83,x84),f4(x82,x83,x84)) % 0.57/0.78 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f4(x93,x91,x94),f4(x93,x92,x94)) % 0.57/0.78 [10]~E(x101,x102)+E(f4(x103,x104,x101),f4(x103,x104,x102)) % 0.57/0.78 [11]~E(x111,x112)+E(f7(x111),f7(x112)) % 0.57/0.78 [12]P1(x122,x123,x124)+~E(x121,x122)+~P1(x121,x123,x124) % 0.57/0.78 [13]P1(x133,x132,x134)+~E(x131,x132)+~P1(x133,x131,x134) % 0.57/0.78 [14]P1(x143,x144,x142)+~E(x141,x142)+~P1(x143,x144,x141) % 0.57/0.78 [15]P2(x152,x153,x154)+~E(x151,x152)+~P2(x151,x153,x154) % 0.57/0.78 [16]P2(x163,x162,x164)+~E(x161,x162)+~P2(x163,x161,x164) % 0.57/0.78 [17]P2(x173,x174,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P2(x173,x174,x171) % 0.57/0.78 % 0.57/0.78 %------------------------------------------- % 0.57/0.78 cnf(26,plain, % 0.57/0.78 (~P1(a8,a2,a5)), % 0.57/0.78 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,21])). % 0.57/0.78 cnf(32,plain, % 0.57/0.78 (P1(f4(f6(a1,a2,a5),f3(a2),a5),f6(a1,a2,a5),a5)), % 0.57/0.78 inference(scs_inference,[],[18,20,19,21,23,12,13,22])). % 0.57/0.78 cnf(34,plain, % 0.57/0.78 (~P1(f4(f6(a1,a2,a5),f3(a2),a5),f3(a2),a5)), % 0.57/0.78 inference(scs_inference,[],[18,20,19,21,23,12,13,22,25])). % 0.57/0.78 cnf(48,plain, % 0.57/0.78 (E(a1,f4(f6(a1,a2,a5),f3(a2),a5))), % 0.57/0.78 inference(scs_inference,[],[26,19,34,32,21,24,12,13,2])). % 0.57/0.78 cnf(79,plain, % 0.57/0.78 ($false), % 0.57/0.78 inference(scs_inference,[],[34,18,32,48,13,12]), % 0.57/0.78 ['proof']). % 0.57/0.78 % SZS output end Proof % 0.57/0.78 % Total time :0.020000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------