%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : SET009-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art02.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 04:46:57 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/SystemOnTPTP1594/SET/SET009-1+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 = 16] [nf = 0] [nu = 8] [ut = 8] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 1 secs [nr = 135] [nf = 13] [nu = 30] [ut = 17] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~subset_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()) % B1: difference_3(b_0(),d_0(),bDd_0()) % B2: difference_3(b_0(),a_0(),bDa_0()) % B3: subset_2(d_0(),a_0()) % B6: member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(x0,x1),x0) | subset_2(x0,x1) % B7: ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(x0,x1),x1) | subset_2(x0,x1) % B8: ~member_2(x0,x2) | ~member_2(x0,x1) | ~difference_3(x3,x1,x2) % B9: ~member_2(x3,x2) | ~difference_3(x0,x1,x2) | member_2(x3,x0) % B10: ~member_2(x0,x1) | ~subset_2(x1,x2) | member_2(x0,x2) % B14: ~member_2(x0,x1) | ~difference_3(x1,x2,x3) | member_2(x0,x3) | member_2(x0,x2) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U6: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),bDa_0()) % U7: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),bDd_0()) % U8: < d2 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),a_0()) % U9: < d2 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),b_0()) % U10: < d2 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),d_0()) % U17: < d3 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),d_0()) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U6: % ~subset_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()) ....... B0 % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(x0,x1),x0) | subset_2(x0,x1) ....... B6 % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), bDa_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B6:L1] % Derivation of unit clause U7: % ~subset_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()) ....... B0 % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(x0,x1),x1) | subset_2(x0,x1) ....... B7 % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), bDd_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B7:L1] % Derivation of unit clause U8: % difference_3(b_0(),a_0(),bDa_0()) ....... B2 % ~member_2(x0,x2) | ~member_2(x0,x1) | ~difference_3(x3,x1,x2) ....... B8 % ~member_2(x0, bDa_0()) | ~member_2(x0, a_0()) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B8:L2] % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),bDa_0()) ....... U6 % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), a_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U6:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U9: % difference_3(b_0(),a_0(),bDa_0()) ....... B2 % ~member_2(x3,x2) | ~difference_3(x0,x1,x2) | member_2(x3,x0) ....... B9 % ~member_2(x0, bDa_0()) | member_2(x0, b_0()) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B9:L1] % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),bDa_0()) ....... U6 % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), b_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U6:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U10: % subset_2(d_0(),a_0()) ....... B3 % ~member_2(x0,x1) | ~subset_2(x1,x2) | member_2(x0,x2) ....... B10 % ~member_2(x0, d_0()) | member_2(x0, a_0()) ....... R1 [B3:L0, B10:L1] % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),a_0()) ....... U8 % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), d_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U8:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U17: % difference_3(b_0(),d_0(),bDd_0()) ....... B1 % ~member_2(x0,x1) | ~difference_3(x1,x2,x3) | member_2(x0,x3) | member_2(x0,x2) ....... B14 % ~member_2(x0, b_0()) | member_2(x0, bDd_0()) | member_2(x0, d_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B14:L1] % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),b_0()) ....... U9 % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), bDd_0()) | member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), d_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U9:L0] % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),bDd_0()) ....... U7 % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(), bDd_0()), d_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U7:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),d_0()) ....... U17 % ~member_2(member_of_1_not_of_2_2(bDa_0(),bDd_0()),d_0()) ....... U10 % [] ....... R1 [U17:L0, U10:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 193 % resolvents: 170 factors: 23 % Number of unit clauses generated: 35 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 18.13 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 4 [1] = 4 [2] = 9 [3] = 1 % Total = 18 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 35 [2] = 115 [3] = 43 % Average size of a generated clause: 3.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] equal_sets_2 (+)1 (-)2 % [1] member_2 (+)5 (-)3 % [2] subset_2 (+)2 (-)1 % [3] difference_3 (+)2 (-)2 % ------------------ % Total: (+)10 (-)8 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 18 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 182 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 204 % Number of unification failures: 97 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 22 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 241 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 173 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0 % Max entries in substitution set: 8 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 9 % 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: 5 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 2 % Number of states in UCFA table: 36 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 58 % 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: 0.62 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 45 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 301 % ConstructUnitClause() = 23 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 1 secs % CPU time: 0.14 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------