%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : iProver---3.9.4
% Problem : SWW956+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% Computer : n014.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 : Fri Sep 25 03:30:34 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 1.78s 1.29s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.78s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 50 ( 19 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 88 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 76 ( 38 ~; 31 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 47 ( 0 sgn 47 !; 0 ?; 17 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f56,axiom,
! [X0,X1] : constr_dec(constr_enc(X1,X0),X0) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax55) ).
fof(f63,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( pred_attacker(X1)
& pred_attacker(X0) )
=> pred_attacker(constr_dec(X0,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax62) ).
fof(f77,axiom,
! [X0] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X0))
=> pred_attacker(X0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax76) ).
fof(f79,axiom,
! [X0] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X0))
=> pred_attacker(X0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax78) ).
fof(f82,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X0,X1))
=> pred_attacker(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax81) ).
fof(f83,axiom,
! [X0] :
( pred_attacker(X0)
=> pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax82) ).
fof(f90,axiom,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(name_P_7,name_G_8)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax89) ).
fof(f91,axiom,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax90) ).
fof(f92,axiom,
! [X0] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0))
=> pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7)))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax91) ).
fof(f94,conjecture,
pred_attacker(name_objective),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co0) ).
fof(f95,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(negated_conjecture,[status(cth)],[f94]) ).
fof(f96,plain,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(flattening,[],[f95]) ).
fof(f104,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| pred_attacker(constr_dec(X0,X1)) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f63]) ).
fof(f105,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| pred_attacker(constr_dec(X0,X1)) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f104]) ).
fof(f115,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X0))
| pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f77]) ).
fof(f117,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X0))
| pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f79]) ).
fof(f121,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X0,X1))
| pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f82]) ).
fof(f122,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0)) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f83]) ).
fof(f128,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0))
| pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7)))) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f92]) ).
fof(f186,plain,
! [X0,X1] : constr_dec(constr_enc(X1,X0),X0) = X1,
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f56]) ).
fof(f193,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| pred_attacker(constr_dec(X0,X1)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f105]) ).
fof(f207,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X0))
| pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f115]) ).
fof(f209,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X0))
| pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f117]) ).
fof(f212,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X0,X1))
| pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f121]) ).
fof(f213,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f122]) ).
fof(f219,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(name_P_7,name_G_8)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f90]) ).
fof(f220,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7))),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f91]) ).
fof(f221,plain,
! [X0] :
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0))
| pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7)))) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f128]) ).
fof(f223,plain,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f96]) ).
tcf(c_104,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] : constr_dec(constr_enc(X0,X1),X1) = X0,
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f186]) ).
tcf(c_111,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] :
( pred_attacker(constr_dec(X1,X0))
| ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f193]) ).
tcf(c_125,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(X0)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X0)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f207]) ).
tcf(c_127,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(X0)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X0)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f209]) ).
tcf(c_130,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] :
( pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X0,X1)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f212]) ).
tcf(c_131,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0))
| ~ pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f213]) ).
tcf(c_137,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(name_P_7,name_G_8)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f219]) ).
tcf(c_138,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7))),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f220]) ).
tcf(c_139,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7))))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X0)) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f221]) ).
tcf(c_141,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f223]) ).
tcf(c_190,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7))))
| ~ pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(prop_impl_just,[status(thm)],[c_131,c_139]) ).
tcf(c_715,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7))))
| ~ pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(prop_impl_just,[status(thm)],[c_190]) ).
tcf(c_1190,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_141]) ).
tcf(c_2210,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7)))
| ~ pred_attacker(X0) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_715,c_125]) ).
tcf(c_2284,plain,
pred_attacker(name_G_8),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_137,c_130]) ).
tcf(c_2285,plain,
pred_attacker(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7)),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_138,c_127]) ).
tcf(c_2326,plain,
! [X0: $i,X1: $i] :
( pred_attacker(X0)
| ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| ~ pred_attacker(constr_enc(X0,X1)) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_104,c_111]) ).
tcf(c_2353,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( pred_attacker(name_objective)
| ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| ~ pred_attacker(constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7)) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_2210,c_2326]) ).
tcf(c_2354,plain,
! [X0: $i] :
( ~ pred_attacker(X0)
| ~ pred_attacker(constr_mod(constr_exp(X0,name_Na),name_P_7)) ),
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2353,c_1190]) ).
tcf(c_2363,plain,
~ pred_attacker(name_G_8),
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_2285,c_2354]) ).
tcf(c_2366,plain,
$false,
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2363,c_2284]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SWW956+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.4.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.15/0.43 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.43 % DateTime : Thu Sep 24 23:15:35 UTC 2026
% 0.15/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.44 Running run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.15/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.50 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/iproveropt-multi-core.sh -d -n -l tptp -s fof_schedule -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.23/0.51
% 0.23/0.51 % ======== iProver multi-core TPTP/SMT =========
% 0.23/0.51
% 0.23/0.51 % Detected problem language: tptp
% 0.23/0.53 % Proving...
% 1.78/1.29 % SZS status Started for theBenchmark.p
% 1.78/1.29 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 %---------------- iProver v3.9.4 (pre CASC 2026/SMT-COMP 2026) ----------------%
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ iProver source info
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % git: date: 2026-07-19 20:42:38 +0200
% 1.78/1.29 % git: sha1: 804e7d636a263075307957e923b7a22a4035de61
% 1.78/1.29 % git: non_committed_changes: false
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Parsing...
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Clausification by vclausify_rel & Parsing by iProver...%
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Preprocessing... sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e pe_s pe:1:0s pe_e sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e pe_s pe_e %
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Preprocessing... gs_s sp: 2 0s gs_e snvd_s sp: 0 0s snvd_e %
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Preprocessing... sf_s rm: 3 0s sf_e sf_s rm: 0 0s sf_e
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Proving...
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Problem Properties
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 %
% 1.78/1.29 % clauses 93
% 1.78/1.29 % conjectures 1
% 1.78/1.29 % EPR 65
% 1.78/1.29 % Horn 92
% 1.78/1.29 % unary 69
% 1.78/1.29 % binary 17
% 1.78/1.29 % lits 124
% 1.78/1.29 % lits eq 57
% 1.78/1.29 % fd_pure 0
% 1.78/1.29 % fd_pseudo 0
% 1.78/1.29 % fd_cond 0
% 1.78/1.29 % fd_pseudo_cond 0
% 1.78/1.29 % AC symbols 0
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Schedule dynamic 5 is on
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Input Options "--resolution_flag false --inst_lit_sel_side none" Time Limit: 10.
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------
% 1.78/1.29 % Current options:
% 1.78/1.29 % ------
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 %
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % ------ Proving...
% 1.78/1.29 %
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 1.78/1.29
% 1.78/1.29
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------