%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : GRP046-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0. % 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 20:46:59 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s % Output : Refutation 0.14s % 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/SystemOnTPTP10096/GRP/GRP046-2+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 = 11] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 5] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 0 secs [nr = 188] [nf = 28] [nu = 91] [ut = 37] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~equalish_2(multiply_2(a_0(),c_0()),multiply_2(b_0(),c_0())) % B1: product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) % B2: product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) % B5: ~equalish_2(x0,x1) | ~product_3(x2,x3,x0) | product_3(x2,x3,x1) % B6: ~product_3(x0,x1,x3) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | equalish_2(x2,x3) % B7: ~product_3(x0,x4,x5) | ~product_3(x1,x3,x4) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | product_3(x2,x3,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 c2 t2 td1 b > equalish_2(a_0(),b_0()) % U8: < d2 v0 dv0 f2 c5 t7 td2 > ~product_3(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),c_0()),multiply_2(b_0(),c_0())) % U11: < d2 v0 dv0 f3 c5 t8 td3 > ~equalish_2(multiply_2(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),c_0())),multiply_2(b_0(),c_0())) % U16: < d2 v0 dv0 f2 c5 t7 td3 > ~product_3(b_0(),c_0(),multiply_2(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),c_0()))) % U19: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 > product_3(identity_0(),a_0(),b_0()) % U40: < d3 v2 dv1 f2 c3 t7 td3 > product_3(b_0(),x0,multiply_2(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),x0))) % --------------- 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: % equalish_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U4 % Derivation of unit clause U8: % ~equalish_2(multiply_2(a_0(),c_0()),multiply_2(b_0(),c_0())) ....... B0 % ~product_3(x0,x1,x3) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | equalish_2(x2,x3) ....... B6 % ~product_3(x0, x1, multiply_2(b_0(), c_0())) | ~product_3(x0, x1, multiply_2(a_0(), c_0())) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B6:L2] % product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) ....... U2 % ~product_3(identity_0(), multiply_2(a_0(), c_0()), multiply_2(b_0(), c_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U11: % product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) ....... B1 % ~equalish_2(x0,x1) | ~product_3(x2,x3,x0) | product_3(x2,x3,x1) ....... B5 % ~equalish_2(multiply_2(x0, x1), x2) | product_3(x0, x1, x2) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B5:L1] % ~product_3(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),c_0()),multiply_2(b_0(),c_0())) ....... U8 % ~equalish_2(multiply_2(identity_0(), multiply_2(a_0(), c_0())), multiply_2(b_0(), c_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U8:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U16: % product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) ....... B1 % ~product_3(x0,x1,x3) | ~product_3(x0,x1,x2) | equalish_2(x2,x3) ....... B6 % ~product_3(x0, x1, x2) | equalish_2(x2, multiply_2(x0, x1)) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B6:L0] % ~equalish_2(multiply_2(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),c_0())),multiply_2(b_0(),c_0())) ....... U11 % ~product_3(b_0(), c_0(), multiply_2(identity_0(), multiply_2(a_0(), c_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U11:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U19: % product_3(identity_0(),x0,x0) ....... B2 % ~equalish_2(x0,x1) | ~product_3(x2,x3,x0) | product_3(x2,x3,x1) ....... B5 % ~equalish_2(x0, x1) | product_3(identity_0(), x0, x1) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B5:L1] % equalish_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U4 % product_3(identity_0(), a_0(), b_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U4:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U40: % 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) ....... B7 % ~product_3(x0, x1, x2) | ~product_3(x3, x0, x4) | product_3(x4, x1, multiply_2(x3, x2)) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B7:L0] % product_3(x0,x1,multiply_2(x0,x1)) ....... U1 % ~product_3(x0, x1, x2) | product_3(x2, x3, multiply_2(x0, multiply_2(x1, x3))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0] % product_3(identity_0(),a_0(),b_0()) ....... U19 % product_3(b_0(), x0, multiply_2(identity_0(), multiply_2(a_0(), x0))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U19:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % product_3(b_0(),x0,multiply_2(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),x0))) ....... U40 % ~product_3(b_0(),c_0(),multiply_2(identity_0(),multiply_2(a_0(),c_0()))) ....... U16 % [] ....... R1 [U40:L0, U16:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 310 % resolvents: 273 factors: 37 % Number of unit clauses generated: 160 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 51.61 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 5 [2] = 32 [3] = 4 % Total = 41 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 160 [2] = 121 [3] = 29 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] equalish_2 (+)15 (-)4 % [1] product_3 (+)16 (-)6 % ------------------ % Total: (+)31 (-)10 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 41 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 68 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 321 % Number of unification failures: 130 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 155 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 57 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 14 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 9 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 69 % 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: 8 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 3 % Number of states in UCFA table: 123 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 217 % Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 80000 % Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.00 % Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.57 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 42 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 451 % ConstructUnitClause() = 105 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.14 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------