TSTP Solution File: LCL111-1 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : LCL111-1 : 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 00:01:54 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.69s
% Output : Refutation 0.69s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP23627/LCL/LCL111-1+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 = 9] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 2638] [nf = 0] [nu = 1687] [ut = 1268]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 8359] [nf = 7] [nu = 6440] [ut = 1268]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(a_0(),b_0()),implies_2(implies_2(c_0(),a_0()),implies_2(c_0(),b_0()))))
% B1: is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2))))
% B5: ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U1: < d0 v6 dv3 f5 c0 t11 td4 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2))))
% U2: < d0 v3 dv2 f2 c0 t5 td3 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0)))
% U4: < d0 v6 dv2 f5 c0 t11 td4 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x0),x0)))
% U21: < d2 v8 dv4 f7 c0 t15 td5 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x2,x1)),x3),implies_2(implies_2(x2,x0),x3)))
% U22: < d2 v5 dv3 f4 c0 t9 td4 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x2),implies_2(x1,x2)))
% U24: < d2 v8 dv3 f7 c0 t15 td5 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x1),x2),implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x1,x0),x0),x2)))
% U1820: < d4 v9 dv5 f14 c6 t29 td6 > ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x2,x1)),x3),implies_2(implies_2(x2,x0),x3)),implies_2(implies_2(x4,implies_2(a_0(),b_0())),implies_2(implies_2(c_0(),a_0()),implies_2(c_0(),b_0())))))
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% Derivation of unit clause U2:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... U2
% Derivation of unit clause U4:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x0),x0))) ....... U4
% Derivation of unit clause U21:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... B1
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B5
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x1, x2), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B5:L1]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), implies_2(x2, x1)), x3), implies_2(implies_2(x2, x0), x3))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U22:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... B1
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B5
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x1, x2), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B5:L1]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... U2
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), x2), implies_2(x1, x2))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U2:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U24:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x2),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... B1
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B5
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x1, x2), implies_2(x0, x2))) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B5:L1]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x1),implies_2(implies_2(x1,x0),x0))) ....... U4
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), x1), x2), implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x1, x0), x0), x2))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U4:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U1820:
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(a_0(),b_0()),implies_2(implies_2(c_0(),a_0()),implies_2(c_0(),b_0())))) ....... B0
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B5
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, implies_2(implies_2(a_0(), b_0()), implies_2(implies_2(c_0(), a_0()), implies_2(c_0(), b_0()))))) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B5:L2]
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(x1) ....... B5
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, implies_2(implies_2(a_0(), b_0()), implies_2(implies_2(c_0(), a_0()), implies_2(c_0(), b_0()))))) | ~is_a_theorem_1(x1) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x1, x0)) ....... R2 [R1:L0, B5:L2]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x2),implies_2(x1,x2))) ....... U22
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, implies_2(implies_2(x1, implies_2(a_0(), b_0())), implies_2(implies_2(c_0(), a_0()), implies_2(c_0(), b_0()))))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U22:L0]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x2,x1)),x3),implies_2(implies_2(x2,x0),x3))) ....... U21
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), implies_2(x2, x1)), x3), implies_2(implies_2(x2, x0), x3)), implies_2(implies_2(x4, implies_2(a_0(), b_0())), implies_2(implies_2(c_0(), a_0()), implies_2(c_0(), b_0()))))) ....... R4 [R3:L0, U21:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x2,x1)),x3),implies_2(implies_2(x2,x0),x3)),implies_2(implies_2(x4,implies_2(a_0(),b_0())),implies_2(implies_2(c_0(),a_0()),implies_2(c_0(),b_0()))))) ....... U1820
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),x1),x2),implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x1,x0),x0),x2))) ....... U24
% [] ....... R1 [U1820:L0, U24:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 9387
% resolvents: 9378 factors: 9
% Number of unit clauses generated: 7453
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 79.40
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 5 [2] = 1263 [4] = 553
% Total = 1821
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 7453 [2] = 1907 [3] = 27
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] is_a_theorem_1 (+)218 (-)1603
% ------------------
% Total: (+)218 (-)1603
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 1821
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 40
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 9397
% Number of unification failures: 9703
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 349243
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 52
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 0
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 712
% Max entries in substitution set: 12
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 663
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 241
% 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: 63
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 10
% Number of states in UCFA table: 19592
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 55610
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.04
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.35
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 40
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 19100
% ConstructUnitClause() = 2479
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.01 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 0 secs
% CPU time: 0.68 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------