%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : KRS002-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art09.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 22:42:24 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 31.00s % Output : Refutation 31.00s % 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/SystemOnTPTP20679/KRS/KRS002-1+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 = 14] [nf = 0] [nu = 2] [ut = 2] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 72] [nf = 2] [nu = 13] [ut = 7] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 363] [nf = 10] [nu = 67] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 1297] [nf = 30] [nu = 230] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 5 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 3747] [nf = 64] [nu = 660] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 6 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 10070] [nf = 157] [nu = 1599] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 7 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 25741] [nf = 358] [nu = 3761] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 8 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 67311] [nf = 878] [nu = 8160] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 9 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 182025] [nf = 2165] [nu = 17670] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 10 ... % t = 2 secs [nr = 515751] [nf = 5299] [nu = 36329] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 11 ... % t = 4 secs [nr = 1470398] [nf = 13142] [nu = 75651] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 12 ... % t = 9 secs [nr = 4228505] [nf = 31636] [nu = 151770] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 13 ... % t = 26 secs [nr = 11848637] [nf = 77065] [nu = 310760] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 14 ... % Entering time slice 2 % Updating parameters ... done. % Looking for a proof at depth = 1 ... % t = 32 secs [nr = 14461400] [nf = 88110] [nu = 310984] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 32 secs [nr = 14461465] [nf = 88112] [nu = 311002] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % t = 32 secs [nr = 14461780] [nf = 88140] [nu = 311056] [ut = 11] % Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: e_1(exist_0()) % B1: ~c_1(x0) | s2least_1(x0) % B2: ~d_1(x0) | s1most_1(x0) % B5: ~e_1(x0) | r_2(x0,u4r2_1(x0)) % B8: ~s2least_1(x0) | s_2(x0,u1r2_1(x0)) % B9: ~s2least_1(x0) | s_2(x0,u1r1_1(x0)) % B10: ~s2least_1(x0) | ~equalish_2(u1r2_1(x0),u1r1_1(x0)) % B12: ~e_1(x1) | ~r_2(x1,x0) | c_1(x0) % B13: ~e_1(x1) | ~r_2(x1,x0) | d_1(x0) % B15: ~s1most_1(x2) | ~s_2(x2,x1) | ~s_2(x2,x0) | equalish_2(x0,x1) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U1: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 > r_2(exist_0(),u4r2_1(exist_0())) % U2: < d2 v0 dv0 f1 c1 t2 td2 > c_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) % U3: < d2 v0 dv0 f1 c1 t2 td2 > d_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) % U4: < d2 v0 dv0 f3 c2 t5 td3 > s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()),u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) % U5: < d2 v0 dv0 f3 c2 t5 td3 > s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()),u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) % U6: < d2 v0 dv0 f4 c2 t6 td3 > ~equalish_2(u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())),u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) % U12: < d4 v0 dv0 f4 c2 t6 td3 > equalish_2(u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())),u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U1: % e_1(exist_0()) ....... B0 % ~e_1(x0) | r_2(x0,u4r2_1(x0)) ....... B5 % r_2(exist_0(), u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B5:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U2: % e_1(exist_0()) ....... B0 % ~e_1(x1) | ~r_2(x1,x0) | c_1(x0) ....... B12 % ~r_2(exist_0(), x0) | c_1(x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B12:L0] % r_2(exist_0(),u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... U1 % c_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U3: % e_1(exist_0()) ....... B0 % ~e_1(x1) | ~r_2(x1,x0) | d_1(x0) ....... B13 % ~r_2(exist_0(), x0) | d_1(x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B13:L0] % r_2(exist_0(),u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... U1 % d_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U4: % ~c_1(x0) | s2least_1(x0) ....... B1 % ~s2least_1(x0) | s_2(x0,u1r2_1(x0)) ....... B8 % ~c_1(x0) | s_2(x0, u1r2_1(x0)) ....... R1 [B1:L1, B8:L0] % c_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... U2 % s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()), u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U5: % ~c_1(x0) | s2least_1(x0) ....... B1 % ~s2least_1(x0) | s_2(x0,u1r1_1(x0)) ....... B9 % ~c_1(x0) | s_2(x0, u1r1_1(x0)) ....... R1 [B1:L1, B9:L0] % c_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... U2 % s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()), u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U6: % ~c_1(x0) | s2least_1(x0) ....... B1 % ~s2least_1(x0) | ~equalish_2(u1r2_1(x0),u1r1_1(x0)) ....... B10 % ~c_1(x0) | ~equalish_2(u1r2_1(x0), u1r1_1(x0)) ....... R1 [B1:L1, B10:L0] % c_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... U2 % ~equalish_2(u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())), u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U12: % ~d_1(x0) | s1most_1(x0) ....... B2 % ~s1most_1(x2) | ~s_2(x2,x1) | ~s_2(x2,x0) | equalish_2(x0,x1) ....... B15 % ~d_1(x0) | ~s_2(x0, x1) | ~s_2(x0, x2) | equalish_2(x2, x1) ....... R1 [B2:L1, B15:L0] % d_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())) ....... U3 % ~s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()), x0) | ~s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()), x1) | equalish_2(x1, x0) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U3:L0] % s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()),u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... U5 % ~s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()), x0) | equalish_2(x0, u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U5:L0] % s_2(u4r2_1(exist_0()),u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... U4 % equalish_2(u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())), u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... R4 [R3:L0, U4:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % equalish_2(u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())),u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... U12 % ~equalish_2(u1r2_1(u4r2_1(exist_0())),u1r1_1(u4r2_1(exist_0()))) ....... U6 % [] ....... R1 [U12:L0, U6:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 14550396 % resolvents: 14462240 factors: 88156 % Number of unit clauses generated: 311176 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 2.14 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 1 [1] = 1 [2] = 5 [3] = 4 % [4] = 2 % Total = 13 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 311176 [2] = 9905920 [3] = 4333232 [4] = 62 [5] = 6 % Average size of a generated clause: 3.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] c_1 (+)1 (-)0 % [1] d_1 (+)1 (-)0 % [2] e_1 (+)1 (-)0 % [3] s1most_1 (+)1 (-)0 % [4] s2least_1 (+)1 (-)0 % [5] equalish_2 (+)4 (-)1 % [6] r_2 (+)1 (-)0 % [7] s_2 (+)2 (-)0 % ------------------ % Total: (+)12 (-)1 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 13 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 11073961 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 135 % Number of successful unifications: 14550411 % Number of unification failures: 4730184 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 3 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 43771199 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 125491498 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 15 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 159125 % 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: 6 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 3 % Number of states in UCFA table: 43 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 52 % 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: 0.83 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 49 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 19280595 % ConstructUnitClause() = 159137 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.15 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: 469368 % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 32 secs % CPU time: 31.00 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------