%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : PUZ002-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0. % 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 03:50:28 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/SystemOnTPTP22266/PUZ/PUZ002-1+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 = 17] [nf = 0] [nu = 8] [ut = 8] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~avoided_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % B1: kangaroo_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % B2: ~carnivore_1(x0) | prowler_1(x0) % B3: ~cat_1(x0) | mouse_killer_1(x0) % B4: ~detested_1(x0) | avoided_1(x0) % B5: detested_1(x0) | takes_to_me_1(x0) % B6: ~gazer_1(x0) | suitable_pet_1(x0) % B7: ~in_house_1(x0) | cat_1(x0) % B8: ~kangaroo_1(x0) | ~suitable_pet_1(x0) % B9: ~mouse_killer_1(x0) | carnivore_1(x0) % B10: ~prowler_1(x0) | gazer_1(x0) % B11: ~takes_to_me_1(x0) | in_house_1(x0) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U2: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~detested_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U3: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~suitable_pet_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U4: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > takes_to_me_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U5: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~gazer_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U6: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~prowler_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U7: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > in_house_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U8: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~mouse_killer_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % U10: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > ~in_house_1(the_kangaroo_0()) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U2: % ~avoided_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... B0 % ~detested_1(x0) | avoided_1(x0) ....... B4 % ~detested_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B4:L1] % Derivation of unit clause U3: % kangaroo_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... B1 % ~kangaroo_1(x0) | ~suitable_pet_1(x0) ....... B8 % ~suitable_pet_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B8:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U4: % detested_1(x0) | takes_to_me_1(x0) ....... B5 % ~detested_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U2 % takes_to_me_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R1 [B5:L0, U2:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U5: % ~gazer_1(x0) | suitable_pet_1(x0) ....... B6 % ~suitable_pet_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U3 % ~gazer_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R1 [B6:L1, U3:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U6: % ~prowler_1(x0) | gazer_1(x0) ....... B10 % ~gazer_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U5 % ~prowler_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R1 [B10:L1, U5:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U7: % ~takes_to_me_1(x0) | in_house_1(x0) ....... B11 % takes_to_me_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U4 % in_house_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R1 [B11:L0, U4:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U8: % ~carnivore_1(x0) | prowler_1(x0) ....... B2 % ~mouse_killer_1(x0) | carnivore_1(x0) ....... B9 % prowler_1(x0) | ~mouse_killer_1(x0) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B9:L1] % ~prowler_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U6 % ~mouse_killer_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U6:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U10: % ~cat_1(x0) | mouse_killer_1(x0) ....... B3 % ~in_house_1(x0) | cat_1(x0) ....... B7 % mouse_killer_1(x0) | ~in_house_1(x0) ....... R1 [B3:L0, B7:L1] % ~mouse_killer_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U8 % ~in_house_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U8:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % ~in_house_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U10 % in_house_1(the_kangaroo_0()) ....... U7 % [] ....... R1 [U10:L0, U7:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 31 % resolvents: 31 factors: 0 % Number of unit clauses generated: 15 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 48.39 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 2 [1] = 6 [2] = 3 % Total = 11 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 15 [2] = 16 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] avoided_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [1] carnivore_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [2] cat_1 (+)0 (-)0 % [3] detested_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [4] gazer_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [5] in_house_1 (+)1 (-)1 % [6] kangaroo_1 (+)1 (-)0 % [7] mouse_killer_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [8] prowler_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [9] suitable_pet_1 (+)0 (-)1 % [10] takes_to_me_1 (+)1 (-)0 % ------------------ % Total: (+)3 (-)8 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 11 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 0 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 41 % Number of unification failures: 0 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 0 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 51 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 126 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 2 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 2 % 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: 1 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 1 % Number of states in UCFA table: 14 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 11 % 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: 1.27 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 46 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 41 % ConstructUnitClause() = 11 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.14 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------