%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : FLD006-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Bugfixed v2.1.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art03.cs.miami.edu % Model : i686 i686 % CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz % Memory : 2018MB % OS : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8 % CPULimit : 300s % DateTime : Sat Nov 27 18:09:52 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s % Output : Refutation 0.24s % 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/SystemOnTPTP19573/FLD/FLD006-1+noeq.car t=300 xo=off uct=32000 % CARINE version 0.734 (Dec 2003) % Initializing tables ... done. % Parsing ............................ done. % Calculating time slices ... done. % Building Lookup Tables ... done. % Looking for a proof at depth = 1 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 118] [nf = 0] [nu = 74] [ut = 46] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~equalish_2(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()),additive_identity_0()) % B1: defined_1(additive_identity_0()) % B4: ~equalish_2(x1,x0) | equalish_2(x0,x1) % B6: ~defined_1(x0) | defined_1(additive_inverse_1(x0)) % B7: ~defined_1(x0) | equalish_2(add_2(additive_identity_0(),x0),x0) % B9: ~defined_1(x0) | equalish_2(add_2(x0,additive_inverse_1(x0)),additive_identity_0()) % B11: ~equalish_2(x2,x1) | ~equalish_2(x0,x2) | equalish_2(x0,x1) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U6: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c1 t2 td2 > defined_1(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())) % U9: < d1 v0 dv0 f2 c3 t5 td3 > equalish_2(add_2(additive_identity_0(),additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())),additive_identity_0()) % U48: < d2 v0 dv0 f3 c3 t6 td3 > ~equalish_2(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()),add_2(additive_identity_0(),additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()))) % U3549: < d2 v0 dv0 f1 c1 t2 td2 > ~defined_1(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U6: % defined_1(additive_identity_0()) ....... B1 % ~defined_1(x0) | defined_1(additive_inverse_1(x0)) ....... B6 % defined_1(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B6:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U9: % defined_1(additive_identity_0()) ....... B1 % ~defined_1(x0) | equalish_2(add_2(x0,additive_inverse_1(x0)),additive_identity_0()) ....... B9 % equalish_2(add_2(additive_identity_0(), additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())), additive_identity_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B9:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U48: % ~equalish_2(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()),additive_identity_0()) ....... B0 % ~equalish_2(x2,x1) | ~equalish_2(x0,x2) | equalish_2(x0,x1) ....... B11 % ~equalish_2(x0, additive_identity_0()) | ~equalish_2(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()), x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B11:L2] % equalish_2(add_2(additive_identity_0(),additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())),additive_identity_0()) ....... U9 % ~equalish_2(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()), add_2(additive_identity_0(), additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U9:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U3549: % ~equalish_2(x1,x0) | equalish_2(x0,x1) ....... B4 % ~defined_1(x0) | equalish_2(add_2(additive_identity_0(),x0),x0) ....... B7 % equalish_2(x0, add_2(additive_identity_0(), x0)) | ~defined_1(x0) ....... R1 [B4:L0, B7:L1] % ~equalish_2(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()),add_2(additive_identity_0(),additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0()))) ....... U48 % ~defined_1(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U48:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % ~defined_1(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())) ....... U3549 % defined_1(additive_inverse_1(additive_identity_0())) ....... U6 % [] ....... R1 [U3549:L0, U6:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 18322 % resolvents: 18278 factors: 44 % Number of unit clauses generated: 18037 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 98.44 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 4 [1] = 42 [2] = 3504 % Total = 3550 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 18037 [2] = 263 [3] = 22 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] defined_1 (+)1207 (-)1 % [1] equalish_2 (+)2322 (-)20 % [2] less_or_equal_2 (+)0 (-)0 % ------------------ % Total: (+)3529 (-)21 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 3550 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 612 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 18328 % Number of unification failures: 3805 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 46442 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 575 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 191 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 4 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 12709 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 7390 % 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: 5 % Number of states in UCFA table: 16552 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 41368 % Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 144000 % Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.11 % Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.40 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 43 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 22133 % ConstructUnitClause() = 16255 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.03 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 1 secs % CPU time: 0.24 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------