TSTP Solution File: MSC002-2 by CARINE---0.734

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CARINE---0.734
% Problem  : MSC002-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : add_equality
% Format   : carine
% Command  : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000

% Computer : art01.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 02:00:23 EST 2010

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 1.11s
% Output   : Refutation 1.11s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP25035/MSC/MSC002-2+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 = 310] [nf = 0] [nu = 296] [ut = 137]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% 	t = 0 secs [nr = 9668] [nf = 0] [nu = 7900] [ut = 917]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% +================================================+
% |                                                |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% |                                                |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~answer_1(x0)
% B1: ~held_2(x0,let_go_1(x1))
% B2: at_3(something_0(),here_0(),now_0())
% B3: ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | at_3(x0,x1,let_go_1(x2))
% B4: ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | at_3(x0,x1,pick_up_1(x2))
% B5: ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | grabbed_2(x0,pick_up_1(go_2(x1,let_go_1(x2))))
% B6: ~at_3(x0,here_0(),x1) | red_1(x0)
% B7: ~grabbed_2(x0,x2) | ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | put_3(x0,x3,go_2(x3,x2))
% B8: ~at_3(x0,x2,x1) | held_2(x0,x1) | at_3(x0,x2,go_2(x3,x1))
% B9: ~red_1(x0) | ~put_3(x0,there_0(),x1) | answer_1(x1)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U3: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > at_3(something_0(),here_0(),let_go_1(now_0()))
% U5: < d1 v0 dv0 f3 c3 t6 td4 > grabbed_2(something_0(),pick_up_1(go_2(here_0(),let_go_1(now_0()))))
% U6: < d1 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 > red_1(something_0())
% U137: < d2 v1 dv1 f0 c2 t3 td1 > ~put_3(something_0(),there_0(),x0)
% U138: < d2 v1 dv1 f2 c3 t6 td3 > at_3(something_0(),here_0(),go_2(x0,let_go_1(now_0())))
% U4876: < d3 v2 dv1 f4 c3 t9 td5 > put_3(something_0(),x0,go_2(x0,pick_up_1(go_2(here_0(),let_go_1(now_0())))))
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U3:
% at_3(something_0(),here_0(),now_0()) ....... B2
% ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | at_3(x0,x1,let_go_1(x2)) ....... B3
%  at_3(something_0(), here_0(), let_go_1(now_0())) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B3:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U5:
% at_3(something_0(),here_0(),now_0()) ....... B2
% ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | grabbed_2(x0,pick_up_1(go_2(x1,let_go_1(x2)))) ....... B5
%  grabbed_2(something_0(), pick_up_1(go_2(here_0(), let_go_1(now_0())))) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B5:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U6:
% at_3(something_0(),here_0(),now_0()) ....... B2
% ~at_3(x0,here_0(),x1) | red_1(x0) ....... B6
%  red_1(something_0()) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B6:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U137:
% ~answer_1(x0) ....... B0
% ~red_1(x0) | ~put_3(x0,there_0(),x1) | answer_1(x1) ....... B9
%  ~red_1(x0) | ~put_3(x0, there_0(), x1) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B9:L2]
%  red_1(something_0()) ....... U6
%   ~put_3(something_0(), there_0(), x0) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U6:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U138:
% ~held_2(x0,let_go_1(x1)) ....... B1
% ~at_3(x0,x2,x1) | held_2(x0,x1) | at_3(x0,x2,go_2(x3,x1)) ....... B8
%  ~at_3(x0, x1, let_go_1(x2)) | at_3(x0, x1, go_2(x3, let_go_1(x2))) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B8:L1]
%  at_3(something_0(),here_0(),let_go_1(now_0())) ....... U3
%   at_3(something_0(), here_0(), go_2(x0, let_go_1(now_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U3:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U4876:
% ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | at_3(x0,x1,pick_up_1(x2)) ....... B4
% ~grabbed_2(x0,x2) | ~at_3(x0,x1,x2) | put_3(x0,x3,go_2(x3,x2)) ....... B7
%  ~at_3(x0, x1, x2) | ~grabbed_2(x0, pick_up_1(x2)) | put_3(x0, x3, go_2(x3, pick_up_1(x2))) ....... R1 [B4:L1, B7:L1]
%  at_3(something_0(),here_0(),go_2(x0,let_go_1(now_0()))) ....... U138
%   ~grabbed_2(something_0(), pick_up_1(go_2(x0, let_go_1(now_0())))) | put_3(something_0(), x1, go_2(x1, pick_up_1(go_2(x0, let_go_1(now_0()))))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U138:L0]
%   grabbed_2(something_0(),pick_up_1(go_2(here_0(),let_go_1(now_0())))) ....... U5
%    put_3(something_0(), x0, go_2(x0, pick_up_1(go_2(here_0(), let_go_1(now_0()))))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U5:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% put_3(something_0(),x0,go_2(x0,pick_up_1(go_2(here_0(),let_go_1(now_0()))))) ....... U4876
% ~put_3(something_0(),there_0(),x0) ....... U137
%  [] ....... R1 [U4876:L0, U137:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% |                Statistics                 |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 209579
% 	resolvents: 209579	factors: 0
% Number of unit clauses generated: 174355
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 83.19
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 3		[1] = 134	[2] = 780	[3] = 3960	
% Total = 4877
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 174355	[2] = 35164	[3] = 60	
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] answer_1		(+)0	(-)1
% [1] red_1		(+)1	(-)0
% [2] grabbed_2		(+)256	(-)1384
% [3] held_2		(+)0	(-)1
% [4] at_3		(+)3232	(-)0
% [5] put_3		(+)1	(-)1
% 			------------------
% 		Total:	(+)3490	(-)1387
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 4877
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 26984
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% 	because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 209589
% Number of unification failures: 708252
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 354304
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 105130
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 3003
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 9
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 135941
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 96790
% 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: 16
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 10
% Number of states in UCFA table: 6298
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 57412
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.01
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.11
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 47
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 917841
% ConstructUnitClause() = 140815
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.19 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% |                                                      |
%   Inferences per sec: 209579
% |                                                      |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 1 secs
% CPU time: 1.10 secs
% 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------