%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : SWV333-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0. % 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 07:01:01 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.39s % Output : Refutation 0.39s % 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/SystemOnTPTP20325/SWV/SWV333-2+noeq.car t=300 xo=off uct=32000 % CARINE version 0.734 (Dec 2003) % Initializing tables ... done. % Parsing .. done. % Calculating time slices ... done. % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: ~c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(x0,c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U0: < d0 v1 dv1 f5 c7 t13 td5 b nc > ~c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(x0,c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) % U1: < d0 v0 dv0 f5 c8 t13 td5 b nc > c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(v_Xa_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U0: % ~c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(x0,c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) ....... U0 % Derivation of unit clause U1: % c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(v_Xa_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) ....... U1 % Derivation of the empty clause: % c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(v_Xa_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) ....... U1 % ~c_in_3(c_Event_Oevent_OSays_3(v_A_0(),v_B_0(),c_Message_Omsg_OMPair_2(x0,c_Message_Omsg_OCrypt_2(v_K_0(),c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_NB_0())))),c_List_Oset_2(v_evs4_0(),tc_Event_Oevent_0()),tc_Event_Oevent_0()) ....... U0 % [] ....... R1 [U1:L0, U0:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 0 % resolvents: 0 factors: 0 % Number of unit clauses generated: 0 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: nan % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 2 % Total = 2 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % Average size of a generated clause: nan % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] c_in_3 (+)1 (-)1 % ------------------ % Total: (+)1 (-)1 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 2 % 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: 0 % Number of unification failures: 0 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 0 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 0 % 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: 0 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 0 % 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: 13 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 5 % Number of states in UCFA table: 29 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 26 % 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: 1.12 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 47 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 0 % ConstructUnitClause() = 0 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: nan % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.38 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------