%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV307-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n007.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 02:54:19 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.25s 0.55s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 20 RR)
% Number of literals : 29 ( 2 equ; 13 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 15 ( 15 usr; 7 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Message_Oparts_OBody__dest_0,axiom,
( ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt(X1,X2),c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X2,c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_Oparts_OBody__dest_0) ).
cnf(cls_Message_OMPair__parts_1,axiom,
( ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(X1,X2),c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_OMPair__parts_1) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_4,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt(c_Public_OshrK(v_A),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(v_NA,c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(c_Message_Omsg_OAgent(v_A),c_Message_Omsg_OAgent(v_B)))),c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,v_evs2)),tc_Message_Omsg),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_4) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_NB),c_Event_Oused(v_evs2),tc_Message_Omsg),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_Event_Oc_A_58_Aparts_A_Iknows_ASpy_Aevs1_J_A_61_61_62_Ac_A_58_Aused_Aevs1_0,axiom,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,X2)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Event_Oused(X2),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Event_Oc_A_58_Aparts_A_Iknows_ASpy_Aevs1_J_A_61_61_62_Ac_A_58_Aused_Aevs1_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_6,negated_conjecture,
v_NA = c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_NB),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_6) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt(X1,X2),c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X2,c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Message_Oparts_OBody__dest_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(X1,X2),c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Message_OMPair__parts_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt(X1,X2),c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X2,c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt(c_Public_OshrK(v_A),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(v_NA,c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(c_Message_Omsg_OAgent(v_A),c_Message_Omsg_OAgent(v_B)))),c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,v_evs2)),tc_Message_Omsg),
cls_conjecture_4 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_NB),c_Event_Oused(v_evs2),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,X2)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Event_Oused(X2),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Event_Oc_A_58_Aparts_A_Iknows_ASpy_Aevs1_J_A_61_61_62_Ac_A_58_Aused_Aevs1_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(X1,X2),c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Message_Oparts(X3),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(v_NA,c_Message_Omsg_OMPair(c_Message_Omsg_OAgent(v_A),c_Message_Omsg_OAgent(v_B))),c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,v_evs2)),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_NB),c_Event_Oused(v_evs2),tc_Message_Omsg),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
v_NA = c_Message_Omsg_ONonce(v_NB),
cls_conjecture_6 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,X2)),tc_Message_Omsg)
| c_in(X1,c_Event_Oused(X2),tc_Message_Omsg) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
c_in(v_NA,c_Message_Oparts(c_Event_Oknows(c_Message_Oagent_OSpy,v_evs2)),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(v_NA,c_Event_Oused(v_evs2),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SWV307-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.41 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.41 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.41 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/0.41 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/0.41 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.41 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.41 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:37:35 UTC 2026
% 0.15/0.41 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.41 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.50 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/0.55 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % sh5l with pid 678059 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.25/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.55 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.55 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.55 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % SubtermCWHack with pid 678065 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.55 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.55 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.55 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.55 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.55
% 0.25/0.55 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.55 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.25/0.55 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.55 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.25/0.55 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.25/0.55 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.25/0.55 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.25/0.55 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.25/0.55 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Generated clauses : 5
% 0.25/0.55 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.25/0.55 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Paramodulations : 5
% 0.25/0.55 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.25/0.55 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.55 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.55 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.55 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.55 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.55 % Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 0.25/0.55 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.25/0.55 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/0.55 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.25/0.55 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.25/0.55 % ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.25/0.55 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.25/0.55 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.25/0.55 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.55 % Termbank termtop insertions : 260
% 0.25/0.55 % Search garbage collected termcells : 11
% 0.25/0.55
% 0.25/0.55 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.55 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.25/0.55 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.25/0.55 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.55 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.25/0.55
% 0.25/0.55 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.55 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.25/0.55 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.25/0.55 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.25/0.55 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.55 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------