%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CARINE---0.734 % Problem : SYN626-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.5.0. % Transfm : add_equality % Format : carine % Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000 % Computer : art11.cs.miami.edu % Model : i686 i686 % CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz @ 3000MHz % Memory : 2006MB % OS : Linux 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE % CPULimit : 300s % DateTime : Sun Nov 28 10:54:53 EST 2010 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.44s % Output : Refutation 0.44s % 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/SystemOnTPTP3367/SYN/SYN626-1+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 = 74] [nf = 0] [nu = 41] [ut = 42] % Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ... % t = 0 secs [nr = 1718] [nf = 22] [nu = 962] [ut = 213] % Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ... % +================================================+ % | | % | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. | % | | % +================================================+ % Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof: % ============================================ % Base Clauses: % ------------- % B0: p11_2(x0,x0) % B2: p6_2(x0,x0) % B3: p7_2(x0,x0) % B6: p15_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) % B10: ~p15_2(x0,x1) | p16_2(x0,x1) % B15: ~p16_2(c22_0(),x0) | p7_2(f12_1(f13_1(x0)),x0) % B23: ~p7_2(x2,x1) | ~p7_2(x2,x0) | p7_2(x0,x1) % B28: ~p15_2(x2,x3) | ~p6_2(x2,x0) | ~p7_2(x3,x1) | p15_2(x0,x1) % Unit Clauses: % -------------- % U6: < d0 v0 dv0 f3 c4 t7 td3 b nc > p15_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) % U7: < d0 v0 dv0 f5 c4 t9 td5 b nc > ~p15_2(c22_0(),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) % U13: < d1 v0 dv0 f3 c4 t7 td3 > p16_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) % U40: < d1 v0 dv0 f8 c6 t14 td5 > p7_2(f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0())))),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) % U72: < d2 v0 dv0 f8 c6 t14 td5 > p7_2(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0())),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) % U350: < d3 v0 dv0 f5 c4 t9 td5 > p15_2(c22_0(),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) % --------------- Start of Proof --------------- % Derivation of unit clause U6: % p15_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) ....... U6 % Derivation of unit clause U7: % ~p15_2(c22_0(),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) ....... U7 % Derivation of unit clause U13: % p15_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) ....... B6 % ~p15_2(x0,x1) | p16_2(x0,x1) ....... B10 % p16_2(c22_0(), f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0()))) ....... R1 [B6:L0, B10:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U40: % ~p16_2(c22_0(),x0) | p7_2(f12_1(f13_1(x0)),x0) ....... B15 % p16_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) ....... U13 % p7_2(f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0())))), f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0()))) ....... R1 [B15:L0, U13:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U72: % p7_2(x0,x0) ....... B3 % ~p7_2(x2,x1) | ~p7_2(x2,x0) | p7_2(x0,x1) ....... B23 % ~p7_2(x0, x1) | p7_2(x1, x0) ....... R1 [B3:L0, B23:L0] % p7_2(f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0())))),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) ....... U40 % p7_2(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0())), f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0()))))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U40:L0] % Derivation of unit clause U350: % p6_2(x0,x0) ....... B2 % ~p15_2(x2,x3) | ~p6_2(x2,x0) | ~p7_2(x3,x1) | p15_2(x0,x1) ....... B28 % ~p15_2(x0, x1) | ~p7_2(x1, x2) | p15_2(x0, x2) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B28:L1] % p15_2(c22_0(),f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))) ....... U6 % ~p7_2(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0())), x0) | p15_2(c22_0(), x0) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U6:L0] % p7_2(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0())),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) ....... U72 % p15_2(c22_0(), f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()), f9_2(c23_0(), c24_0()))))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U72:L0] % Derivation of the empty clause: % p15_2(c22_0(),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) ....... U350 % ~p15_2(c22_0(),f12_1(f13_1(f8_2(f5_1(c20_0()),f9_2(c23_0(),c24_0()))))) ....... U7 % [] ....... R1 [U350:L0, U7:L0] % --------------- End of Proof --------------- % PROOF FOUND! % --------------------------------------------- % | Statistics | % --------------------------------------------- % Profile 3: Performance Statistics: % ================================== % Total number of generated clauses: 2834 % resolvents: 2780 factors: 54 % Number of unit clauses generated: 1869 % % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 65.95 % Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]: % ============================================================= % [0] = 10 [1] = 32 [2] = 171 [3] = 138 % Total = 351 % Number of generated clauses having [x] literals: % ------------------------------------------------ % [1] = 1869 [2] = 878 [3] = 87 % Average size of a generated clause: 2.0 % Number of unit clauses per predicate list: % ========================================== % [0] p11_2 (+)92 (-)0 % [1] p14_2 (+)3 (-)0 % [2] p15_2 (+)2 (-)1 % [3] p16_2 (+)11 (-)0 % [4] p17_2 (+)0 (-)1 % [5] p18_2 (+)0 (-)1 % [6] p19_2 (+)0 (-)1 % [7] p2_2 (+)12 (-)0 % [8] p3_2 (+)98 (-)0 % [9] p6_2 (+)30 (-)0 % [10] p7_2 (+)99 (-)0 % ------------------ % Total: (+)347 (-)4 % Total number of unit clauses retained: 351 % Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 1650 % N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses % because of the shortest resolvents table: 0 % Number of successful unifications: 2841 % Number of unification failures: 440 % Number of unit to unit unification failures: 1 % N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 995 % N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 1484 % N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 5 % Max entries in substitution set: 8 % N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 1018 % N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 124 % 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: 34 % Max term depth in a unit clause: 12 % Number of states in UCFA table: 2521 % Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 5757 % 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: 0.44 % Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 57 % Profile 2: Number of calls to: % ============================== % PTUnify() = 3281 % ConstructUnitClause() = 1359 % Profile 1: Time spent in: % ========================= % ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs % -------------------------------------------------------- % | | % Inferences per sec: inf % | | % -------------------------------------------------------- % Elapsed time: 0 secs % CPU time: 0.42 secs % %------------------------------------------------------------------------------