TSTP Solution File: FLD056-3 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : FLD056-3 : TPTP v5.0.0. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 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 : Sat Nov 27 19:08:22 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.23s
% Output : Refutation 0.23s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP27133/FLD/FLD056-3+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 = 110] [nf = 0] [nu = 66] [ut = 42]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 53920] [nf = 66] [nu = 40220] [ut = 1507]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0())
% B25: ~defined_1(x1) | ~defined_1(x0) | less_or_equal_2(x0,x1) | less_or_equal_2(x1,x0)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U0: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c2 t2 td1 b nc > ~less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0())
% U3: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 b > defined_1(a_0())
% U1508: < d3 v0 dv0 f0 c2 t2 td1 > less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0())
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U0:
% ~less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0()) ....... U0
% Derivation of unit clause U3:
% defined_1(a_0()) ....... U3
% Derivation of unit clause U1508:
% ~less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0()) ....... B0
% ~defined_1(x1) | ~defined_1(x0) | less_or_equal_2(x0,x1) | less_or_equal_2(x1,x0) ....... B25
% ~defined_1(a_0()) | ~defined_1(a_0()) | less_or_equal_2(a_0(), a_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B25:L2]
% ~defined_1(a_0()) | less_or_equal_2(a_0(), a_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L1, R1:L0]
% defined_1(a_0()) ....... U3
% less_or_equal_2(a_0(), a_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U3:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0()) ....... U1508
% ~less_or_equal_2(a_0(),a_0()) ....... U0
% [] ....... R1 [U1508:L0, U0:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 54033
% resolvents: 53952 factors: 81
% Number of unit clauses generated: 40231
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 74.46
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 5 [1] = 37 [2] = 1465 [3] = 2
% Total = 1509
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 40231 [2] = 13755 [3] = 47
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] defined_1 (+)1345 (-)0
% [1] less_or_equal_2 (+)1 (-)2
% [2] product_3 (+)62 (-)0
% [3] sum_3 (+)98 (-)1
% ------------------
% Total: (+)1506 (-)3
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 1509
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 624
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 54036
% Number of unification failures: 799
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 98
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 809
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 421
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 7
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 33495
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 14813
% 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: 8
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 4
% Number of states in UCFA table: 1690
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 9552
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 80000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.02
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.18
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 45
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 54835
% ConstructUnitClause() = 34999
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.02 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 0 secs
% CPU time: 0.23 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------