%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : LCL414-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.5.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art07.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 01:23:14 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/SystemOnTPTP1282/LCL/LCL414-1+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 = 6] [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: a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x2)),implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x2)))) % B1: a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) % B3: ~a_truth_1(implies_2(x1,x0)) | ~a_truth_1(x1) | a_truth_1(x0) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U1: < d0 v3 dv2 f2 c0 t5 td3 b nc > a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) % U3: < d0 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 b nc > ~a_truth_1(implies_2(sk1_0(),sk1_0())) % U5: < d2 v4 dv2 f3 c0 t7 td3 > a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x0))) % U88: < d2 v2 dv1 f1 c0 t3 td2 > a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,x0)) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U1: % a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... U1 % Derivation of unit clause U3: % ~a_truth_1(implies_2(sk1_0(),sk1_0())) ....... U3 % Derivation of unit clause U5: % a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x2)),implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... B0 % ~a_truth_1(implies_2(x1,x0)) | ~a_truth_1(x1) | a_truth_1(x0) ....... B3 % ~a_truth_1(implies_2(x0, implies_2(x1, x2))) | a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B3:L0] % a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... U1 % a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), implies_2(x0, x0))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U88: % a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... B1 % ~a_truth_1(implies_2(x1,x0)) | ~a_truth_1(x1) | a_truth_1(x0) ....... B3 % ~a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0, implies_2(x1, x0)), x2)) | a_truth_1(x2) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B3:L1] % a_truth_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x0))) ....... U5 % a_truth_1(implies_2(x0, x0)) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U5:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % a_truth_1(implies_2(x0,x0)) ....... U88 % ~a_truth_1(implies_2(sk1_0(),sk1_0())) ....... U3 % [] ....... R1 [U88:L0, U3:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 117 % resolvents: 117 factors: 0 % Number of unit clauses generated: 107 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 91.45 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 4 [2] = 85 % Total = 89 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 107 [2] = 10 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] a_truth_1 (+)84 (-)5 % ------------------ % Total: (+)84 (-)5 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 89 % 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: 121 % Number of unification failures: 21 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 415 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 4 % 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: 5 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 22 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 13 % 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: 45 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 10 % Number of states in UCFA table: 1034 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 1883 % 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: 0.55 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 38 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 142 % ConstructUnitClause() = 107 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 1 secs % CPU time: 0.34 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------