%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : LCL398-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.3.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art04.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 01:17:08 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.36s % Output : Refutation 0.36s % 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/SystemOnTPTP4521/LCL/LCL398-1+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 = 0 secs [nr = 7] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 4] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x_0(),x_0())),y_0())) % B1: is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) % B2: is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(not_1(x0),x1))) % B4: ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U2: < d0 v3 dv2 f3 c0 t6 td4 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(not_1(x0),x1))) % U3: < d0 v3 dv1 f3 c0 t6 td4 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x0),x0)) % U6: < d2 v3 dv1 f7 c3 t13 td5 > ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x0),x0),implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x_0(),x_0())),y_0()))) % U32: < d2 v5 dv3 f5 c0 t10 td5 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x1),x2),implies_2(x0,x2))) % U38: < d2 v7 dv4 f7 c0 t14 td6 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x2),implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x3),x1),x2))) % U71: < d2 v6 dv4 f7 c0 t13 td5 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x1),x2),implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x0,x2)),x3))) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U2: % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(not_1(x0),x1))) ....... U2 % Derivation of unit clause U3: % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x0),x0)) ....... U3 % Derivation of unit clause U6: % ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x_0(),x_0())),y_0())) ....... B0 % ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B4 % ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x_0(), x_0())), y_0()))) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B4:L2] % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x0),x0)) ....... U3 % ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), x0), x0), implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x_0(), x_0())), y_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U3:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U32: % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... B1 % ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B4 % ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x1, x2), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B4:L1] % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(not_1(x0),x1))) ....... U2 % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), x1), x2), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U38: % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... B1 % ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B4 % ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x1, x2), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B4:L1] % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x1),x2),implies_2(x0,x2))) ....... U32 % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), x2), implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), x3), x1), x2))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U32:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U71: % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(not_1(x0),x1))) ....... B2 % ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B4 % ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0, implies_2(not_1(x0), x1)), x2)) | is_a_theorem_1(x2) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B4:L0] % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x2),implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x3),x1),x2))) ....... U38 % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), x1), x2), implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x0, x2)), x3))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U38:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x1),x2),implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x0,x2)),x3))) ....... U71 % ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),x0),x0),implies_2(not_1(implies_2(x_0(),x_0())),y_0()))) ....... U6 % [] ....... R1 [U71:L0, U6:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 91 % resolvents: 91 factors: 0 % Number of unit clauses generated: 80 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 87.91 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 4 [2] = 68 % Total = 72 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 80 [2] = 11 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] is_a_theorem_1 (+)47 (-)25 % ------------------ % Total: (+)47 (-)25 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 72 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 3 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 99 % Number of unification failures: 39 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 1153 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 8 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 0 % 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: 12 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 6 % 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: 62 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 10 % Number of states in UCFA table: 771 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 1729 % Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000 % Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.00 % Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.45 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 39 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 138 % ConstructUnitClause() = 80 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.35 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------