%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : GRP045-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art06.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 20:45:09 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.18s % Output : Refutation 0.18s % 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/SystemOnTPTP30742/GRP/GRP045-2+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 = 0 secs [nr = 14] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 6] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 0 secs [nr = 226] [nf = 36] [nu = 100] [ut = 44] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~product_3(c_0(),b_0(),result_0()) % B1: product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) % B2: product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) % B6: ~equalish_2(x0,x1) | ~product_3(x2,x3,x0) | product_3(x2,x3,x1) % B8: ~product_3(x0,x4,x5) | ~product_3(x1,x3,x4) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | product_3(x2,x3,x5) % B9: ~product_3(x2,x3,x5) | ~product_3(x1,x3,x4) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | product_3(x0,x4,x5) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U1: < d0 v4 dv2 f1 c0 t5 td2 b > product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) % U2: < d0 v2 dv1 f0 c1 t3 td1 b > product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) % U4: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 b > product_3(c_0(),a_0(),result_0()) % U5: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c2 t2 td1 b > equalish_2(a_0(),b_0()) % U14: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 > product_3(identity_0(),a_0(),b_0()) % U52: < d3 v0 dv0 f1 c4 t5 td2 > ~product_3(multiply_2(c_0(),identity_0()),a_0(),result_0()) % U225: < d3 v0 dv0 f1 c4 t5 td2 > product_3(multiply_2(c_0(),identity_0()),a_0(),result_0()) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U1: % product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) ....... U1 % Derivation of unit clause U2: % product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) ....... U2 % Derivation of unit clause U4: % product_3(c_0(),a_0(),result_0()) ....... U4 % Derivation of unit clause U5: % equalish_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U5 % Derivation of unit clause U14: % product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) ....... B2 % ~equalish_2(x0,x1) | ~product_3(x2,x3,x0) | product_3(x2,x3,x1) ....... B6 % ~equalish_2(x0, x1) | product_3(identity_0(), x0, x1) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B6:L1] % equalish_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U5 % product_3(identity_0(), a_0(), b_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U5:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U52: % ~product_3(c_0(),b_0(),result_0()) ....... B0 % ~product_3(x2,x3,x5) | ~product_3(x1,x3,x4) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | product_3(x0,x4,x5) ....... B9 % ~product_3(x0, x1, result_0()) | ~product_3(x2, x1, b_0()) | ~product_3(c_0(), x2, x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B9:L3] % product_3(identity_0(),a_0(),b_0()) ....... U14 % ~product_3(x0, a_0(), result_0()) | ~product_3(c_0(), identity_0(), x0) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U14:L0] % product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) ....... U1 % ~product_3(multiply_2(c_0(), identity_0()), a_0(), result_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L1, U1:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U225: % product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) ....... B1 % ~product_3(x0,x4,x5) | ~product_3(x1,x3,x4) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | product_3(x2,x3,x5) ....... B8 % ~product_3(x0, x1, x2) | ~product_3(x3, x4, x1) | product_3(multiply_2(x0, x3), x4, x2) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B8:L2] % product_3(c_0(),a_0(),result_0()) ....... U4 % ~product_3(x0, x1, a_0()) | product_3(multiply_2(c_0(), x0), x1, result_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U4:L0] % product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) ....... U2 % product_3(multiply_2(c_0(), identity_0()), a_0(), result_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % product_3(multiply_2(c_0(),identity_0()),a_0(),result_0()) ....... U225 % ~product_3(multiply_2(c_0(),identity_0()),a_0(),result_0()) ....... U52 % [] ....... R1 [U225:L0, U52:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 9761 % resolvents: 9707 factors: 54 % Number of unit clauses generated: 9153 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 93.77 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 6 [2] = 38 [3] = 182 % Total = 226 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 9153 [2] = 567 [3] = 41 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] equalish_2 (+)22 (-)1 % [1] product_3 (+)144 (-)59 % ------------------ % Total: (+)166 (-)60 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 226 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 912 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 9769 % Number of unification failures: 46317 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 8471 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 83 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 9 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 10 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 8864 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 767 % 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: 8 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 4 % Number of states in UCFA table: 580 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 1510 % Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 80000 % Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.01 % Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.38 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 43 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 56086 % ConstructUnitClause() = 9084 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.01 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.18 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------