%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : NUM015-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art06.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 03:06:05 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/SystemOnTPTP12328/NUM/NUM015-1+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 = 4] [ut = 6] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 89] [nf = 4] [nu = 27] [ut = 10] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~prime_1(x0) | ~divides_2(x0,a_0()) % B3: prime_1(x0) | divides_2(divisor_1(x0),x0) % B4: prime_1(x0) | less_2(divisor_1(x0),x0) % B5: prime_1(x0) | less_2(n1_0(),divisor_1(x0)) % B6: ~divides_2(x1,x2) | ~divides_2(x0,x1) | divides_2(x0,x2) % B7: ~less_2(x0,a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(),x0) | prime_1(factor_of_1(x0)) % B8: ~less_2(x0,a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(),x0) | divides_2(factor_of_1(x0),x0) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U1: < d0 v2 dv1 f0 c0 t2 td1 b > divides_2(x0,x0) % U2: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~prime_1(a_0()) % U4: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 > less_2(divisor_1(a_0()),a_0()) % U5: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 > less_2(n1_0(),divisor_1(a_0())) % U11: < d3 v0 dv0 f2 c2 t4 td3 > ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())),a_0()) % U14: < d3 v0 dv0 f3 c2 t5 td3 > ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())),divisor_1(a_0())) % U20: < d3 v0 dv0 f3 c2 t5 td3 > divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())),divisor_1(a_0())) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U1: % divides_2(x0,x0) ....... U1 % Derivation of unit clause U2: % ~prime_1(x0) | ~divides_2(x0,a_0()) ....... B0 % divides_2(x0,x0) ....... U1 % ~prime_1(a_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L1, U1:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U4: % prime_1(x0) | less_2(divisor_1(x0),x0) ....... B4 % ~prime_1(a_0()) ....... U2 % less_2(divisor_1(a_0()), a_0()) ....... R1 [B4:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U5: % prime_1(x0) | less_2(n1_0(),divisor_1(x0)) ....... B5 % ~prime_1(a_0()) ....... U2 % less_2(n1_0(), divisor_1(a_0())) ....... R1 [B5:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U11: % ~prime_1(x0) | ~divides_2(x0,a_0()) ....... B0 % ~less_2(x0,a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(),x0) | prime_1(factor_of_1(x0)) ....... B7 % ~divides_2(factor_of_1(x0), a_0()) | ~less_2(x0, a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(), x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B7:L2] % less_2(divisor_1(a_0()),a_0()) ....... U4 % ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())), a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(), divisor_1(a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U4:L0] % less_2(n1_0(),divisor_1(a_0())) ....... U5 % ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())), a_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L1, U5:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U14: % prime_1(x0) | divides_2(divisor_1(x0),x0) ....... B3 % ~divides_2(x1,x2) | ~divides_2(x0,x1) | divides_2(x0,x2) ....... B6 % prime_1(x0) | ~divides_2(x1, divisor_1(x0)) | divides_2(x1, x0) ....... R1 [B3:L1, B6:L0] % ~prime_1(a_0()) ....... U2 % ~divides_2(x0, divisor_1(a_0())) | divides_2(x0, a_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0] % ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())),a_0()) ....... U11 % ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())), divisor_1(a_0())) ....... R3 [R2:L1, U11:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U20: % prime_1(x0) | less_2(divisor_1(x0),x0) ....... B4 % ~less_2(x0,a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(),x0) | divides_2(factor_of_1(x0),x0) ....... B8 % prime_1(a_0()) | ~less_2(n1_0(), divisor_1(a_0())) | divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())), divisor_1(a_0())) ....... R1 [B4:L1, B8:L0] % ~prime_1(a_0()) ....... U2 % ~less_2(n1_0(), divisor_1(a_0())) | divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())), divisor_1(a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0] % less_2(n1_0(),divisor_1(a_0())) ....... U5 % divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())), divisor_1(a_0())) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U5:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())),divisor_1(a_0())) ....... U20 % ~divides_2(factor_of_1(divisor_1(a_0())),divisor_1(a_0())) ....... U14 % [] ....... R1 [U20:L0, U14:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 400 % resolvents: 377 factors: 23 % Number of unit clauses generated: 113 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 28.25 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 2 [1] = 4 [2] = 4 [3] = 11 % Total = 21 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 113 [2] = 228 [3] = 59 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] prime_1 (+)1 (-)3 % [1] divides_2 (+)8 (-)4 % [2] less_2 (+)5 (-)0 % ------------------ % Total: (+)14 (-)7 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 21 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 253 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 412 % Number of unification failures: 386 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 32 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 735 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 332 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 6 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 62 % 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: 7 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 4 % Number of states in UCFA table: 40 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 85 % 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: 0.47 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 41 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 798 % ConstructUnitClause() = 81 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 1 secs % CPU time: 0.14 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------