%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : LCL197-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.1.0. % 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 : Sun Nov 28 00:21:06 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.49s % Output : Refutation 0.49s % 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/SystemOnTPTP31354/LCL/LCL197-1+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 = 18] [nf = 0] [nu = 10] [ut = 12] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 4368] [nf = 1] [nu = 2542] [ut = 1482] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(q_0(),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) % B3: axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),or_2(x1,x0))) % B6: ~axiom_1(x0) | theorem_1(x0) % B7: ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x2)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2),x1)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x1)) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U1: < d0 v6 dv3 f6 c0 t12 td5 b > axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(x1,x2))),or_2(x1,or_2(x0,x2)))) % U4: < d0 v4 dv2 f4 c0 t8 td4 b > axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x1)),or_2(x1,x0))) % U5: < d0 v3 dv1 f3 c0 t6 td4 b > axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0)) % U14: < d2 v0 dv0 f5 c5 t10 td5 > ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(or_2(p_0(),q_0()),q_0())),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) % U52: < d2 v1 dv1 f6 c5 t12 td6 > ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(or_2(p_0(),q_0()),q_0()))),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) % U1843: < d3 v6 dv2 f6 c0 t12 td6 > theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(or_2(x0,x1),x1))),or_2(x0,x1))) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U1: % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(x1,x2))),or_2(x1,or_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1 % Derivation of unit clause U4: % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x1)),or_2(x1,x0))) ....... U4 % Derivation of unit clause U5: % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0)) ....... U5 % Derivation of unit clause U14: % ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(q_0(),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) ....... B0 % ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x2)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2),x1)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x1)) ....... B7 % ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(q_0(), or_2(p_0(), q_0()))), x0)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0), or_2(p_0(), q_0()))) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B7:L2] % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x1)),or_2(x1,x0))) ....... U4 % ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(or_2(p_0(), q_0()), q_0())), or_2(p_0(), q_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U4:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U52: % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),or_2(x1,x0))) ....... B3 % ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x2)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2),x1)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x1)) ....... B7 % ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0, x1)), x2)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x1), x2)) ....... R1 [B3:L0, B7:L0] % ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(or_2(p_0(),q_0()),q_0())),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) ....... U14 % ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0, or_2(or_2(p_0(), q_0()), q_0()))), or_2(p_0(), q_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U14:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U1843: % ~axiom_1(x0) | theorem_1(x0) ....... B6 % ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x2)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2),x1)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x1)) ....... B7 % ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0), x1)) | ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x2), x0)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2), x1)) ....... R1 [B6:L1, B7:L1] % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0)) ....... U5 % ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0), or_2(x1, x1))) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0), x1)) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U5:L0] % axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(x1,x2))),or_2(x1,or_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1 % theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0, or_2(or_2(x0, x1), x1))), or_2(x0, x1))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U1:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(or_2(x0,x1),x1))),or_2(x0,x1))) ....... U1843 % ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(or_2(p_0(),q_0()),q_0()))),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) ....... U52 % [] ....... R1 [U1843:L0, U52:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 11045 % resolvents: 11041 factors: 4 % Number of unit clauses generated: 9165 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 82.98 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 6 [1] = 6 [2] = 1470 [3] = 362 % Total = 1844 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 9165 [2] = 1849 [3] = 31 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] axiom_1 (+)5 (-)360 % [1] theorem_1 (+)1261 (-)218 % ------------------ % Total: (+)1266 (-)578 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 1844 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 74 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 11052 % Number of unification failures: 9544 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 276490 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 225 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 11 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 848 % Max entries in substitution set: 7 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 1392 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 77 % 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: 63 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 11 % Number of states in UCFA table: 12082 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 39932 % Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000 % Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.02 % Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.30 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 40 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 20596 % ConstructUnitClause() = 3230 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 1 secs % CPU time: 0.48 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------