TSTP Solution File: NUM016-1 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : NUM016-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : add_equality
% Format : carine
% Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000
% Computer : art05.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 03:06:13 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/SystemOnTPTP16871/NUM/NUM016-1+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 = 23] [nf = 2] [nu = 15] [ut = 8]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 1 secs [nr = 107] [nf = 10] [nu = 46] [ut = 8]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% t = 1 secs [nr = 688] [nf = 50] [nu = 255] [ut = 26]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~prime_1(x0) | ~less_2(a_0(),x0) | less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()),x0)
% B5: ~divides_2(x0,x1) | ~less_2(x1,x0)
% B8: prime_1(x0) | prime_1(prime_divisor_1(x0))
% B9: prime_1(x0) | divides_2(prime_divisor_1(x0),x0)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U0: < d0 v2 dv1 f0 c0 t2 td1 b > ~less_2(x0,x0)
% U1: < d0 v2 dv1 f1 c0 t3 td2 b > less_2(x0,factorial_plus_one_1(x0))
% U11: < d3 v0 dv0 f2 c1 t3 td3 > prime_1(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())))
% U12: < d3 v0 dv0 f3 c2 t5 td3 > divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())),factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()))
% U26: < d4 v0 dv0 f3 c2 t5 td3 > ~divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())),factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()))
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U0:
% ~less_2(x0,x0) ....... U0
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% less_2(x0,factorial_plus_one_1(x0)) ....... U1
% Derivation of unit clause U11:
% ~prime_1(x0) | ~less_2(a_0(),x0) | less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()),x0) ....... B0
% prime_1(x0) | prime_1(prime_divisor_1(x0)) ....... B8
% ~less_2(a_0(), x0) | less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()), x0) | prime_1(prime_divisor_1(x0)) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B8:L0]
% less_2(x0,factorial_plus_one_1(x0)) ....... U1
% less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) | prime_1(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% ~less_2(x0,x0) ....... U0
% prime_1(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U0:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U12:
% ~prime_1(x0) | ~less_2(a_0(),x0) | less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()),x0) ....... B0
% prime_1(x0) | divides_2(prime_divisor_1(x0),x0) ....... B9
% ~less_2(a_0(), x0) | less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()), x0) | divides_2(prime_divisor_1(x0), x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B9:L0]
% less_2(x0,factorial_plus_one_1(x0)) ....... U1
% less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) | divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% ~less_2(x0,x0) ....... U0
% divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U0:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U26:
% ~prime_1(x0) | ~less_2(a_0(),x0) | less_2(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()),x0) ....... B0
% ~divides_2(x0,x1) | ~less_2(x1,x0) ....... B5
% ~prime_1(x0) | ~less_2(a_0(), x0) | ~divides_2(x0, factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... R1 [B0:L2, B5:L1]
% prime_1(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()))) ....... U11
% ~less_2(a_0(), prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0()))) | ~divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U11:L0]
% ~divides_2(x0,factorial_plus_one_1(x1)) | less_2(x1,x0) ....... B7
% ~divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) | ~divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... R3 [R2:L0, B7:L1]
% ~divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())), factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... R4 [R3:L0, R3:L1]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% ~divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())),factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... U26
% divides_2(prime_divisor_1(factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())),factorial_plus_one_1(a_0())) ....... U12
% [] ....... R1 [U26:L0, U12:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 755
% resolvents: 703 factors: 52
% Number of unit clauses generated: 259
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 34.30
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 4 [1] = 4 [3] = 18
% [4] = 1
% Total = 27
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 259 [2] = 388 [3] = 108
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] prime_1 (+)2 (-)1
% [1] divides_2 (+)2 (-)14
% [2] less_2 (+)3 (-)5
% ------------------
% Total: (+)7 (-)20
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 27
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 305
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 10
% Number of successful unifications: 765
% Number of unification failures: 484
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 44
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 1558
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 811
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 6
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 155
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 4
% 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: 6
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 4
% Number of states in UCFA table: 63
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 103
% 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: 0.61
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 40
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 1249
% ConstructUnitClause() = 178
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 1 secs
% CPU time: 0.14 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------