%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : ANA042-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art11.cs.miami.edu % Model : i686 i686 % CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz @ 3000MHz % Memory : 2006MB % OS : Linux 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE % CPULimit : 300s % DateTime : Sat Nov 27 17:33:32 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.37s % Output : Refutation 0.37s % Verified : % SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails) % Syntax : Number of formulae : 0 % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % Command entered: % /home/graph/tptp/Systems/CARINE---0.734/carine /tmp/SystemOnTPTP3447/ANA/ANA042-2+noeq.car t=300 xo=off uct=32000 % CARINE version 0.734 (Dec 2003) % Initializing tables ... done. % Parsing .. done. % Calculating time slices ... done. % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),c_times_3(v_x_0(),v_h_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U0: < d0 v4 dv2 f4 c4 t12 td3 b nc > c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),c_times_3(v_x_0(),v_h_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) % U1: < d0 v5 dv1 f8 c3 t16 td4 b nc > ~c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(v_xa_1(x0),v_xb_1(x0)),t_c_0()),c_times_3(x0,v_h_2(v_xa_1(x0),v_xb_1(x0)),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U0: % c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),c_times_3(v_x_0(),v_h_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) ....... U0 % Derivation of unit clause U1: % ~c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(v_xa_1(x0),v_xb_1(x0)),t_c_0()),c_times_3(x0,v_h_2(v_xa_1(x0),v_xb_1(x0)),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) ....... U1 % Derivation of the empty clause: % ~c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(v_xa_1(x0),v_xb_1(x0)),t_c_0()),c_times_3(x0,v_h_2(v_xa_1(x0),v_xb_1(x0)),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) ....... U1 % c_lessequals_3(c_HOL_Oabs_2(v_f_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),c_times_3(v_x_0(),v_h_2(x0,x1),t_c_0()),t_c_0()) ....... U0 % [] ....... R1 [U1:L0, U0:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 0 % resolvents: 0 factors: 0 % Number of unit clauses generated: 0 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: -nan % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 2 % Total = 2 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % Average size of a generated clause: -nan % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] c_lessequals_3 (+)1 (-)1 % ------------------ % Total: (+)1 (-)1 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 2 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 0 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 0 % Number of unification failures: 0 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 0 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 0 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 0 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 0 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 0 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 0 % N unit clauses not constrcuted because table was full: 0 % N unit clauses dropped because UCFA table was full: 0 % Max number of terms in a unit clause: 16 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 4 % Number of states in UCFA table: 31 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 28 % Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000 % Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.00 % Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 1.11 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 43 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 0 % ConstructUnitClause() = 0 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: -nan % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.36 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------