TSTP Solution File: LAT270-2 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : LAT270-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : add_equality
% Format : carine
% Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000
% Computer : art04.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 23:11:12 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/SystemOnTPTP24355/LAT/LAT270-2+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 = 0] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 4]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 6] [nf = 2] [nu = 0] [ut = 4]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: c_in_3(v_a_0(),v_A_0(),t_a_0())
% B4: ~c_in_3(x1,v_A_0(),t_a_0()) | ~c_in_3(x0,v_A_0(),t_a_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(x2,c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(),x1,x0,t_a_0()),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) | c_lessequals_3(x2,v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0()))
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U1: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 b nc > c_in_3(v_b_0(),v_A_0(),t_a_0())
% U2: < d0 v0 dv0 f2 c6 t8 td2 b nc > c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(),v_a_0(),v_b_0(),t_a_0()),tc_set_1(t_a_0()))
% U3: < d0 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 b nc > ~c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0()))
% U5: < d3 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0()))
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% c_in_3(v_b_0(),v_A_0(),t_a_0()) ....... U1
% Derivation of unit clause U2:
% c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(),v_a_0(),v_b_0(),t_a_0()),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... U2
% Derivation of unit clause U3:
% ~c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... U3
% Derivation of unit clause U5:
% c_in_3(v_a_0(),v_A_0(),t_a_0()) ....... B0
% ~c_in_3(x1,v_A_0(),t_a_0()) | ~c_in_3(x0,v_A_0(),t_a_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(x2,c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(),x1,x0,t_a_0()),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) | c_lessequals_3(x2,v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... B4
% ~c_in_3(x0, v_A_0(), t_a_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(x1, c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(), v_a_0(), x0, t_a_0()), tc_set_1(t_a_0())) | c_lessequals_3(x1, v_A_0(), tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B4:L0]
% c_in_3(v_b_0(),v_A_0(),t_a_0()) ....... U1
% ~c_lessequals_3(x0, c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(), v_a_0(), v_b_0(), t_a_0()), tc_set_1(t_a_0())) | c_lessequals_3(x0, v_A_0(), tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),c_Tarski_Ointerval_4(v_r_0(),v_a_0(),v_b_0(),t_a_0()),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... U2
% c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(), v_A_0(), tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U2:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... U5
% ~c_lessequals_3(v_S_0(),v_A_0(),tc_set_1(t_a_0())) ....... U3
% [] ....... R1 [U5:L0, U3:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 13
% resolvents: 11 factors: 2
% Number of unit clauses generated: 2
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 15.38
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 4 [3] = 2
% Total = 6
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 2 [2] = 4 [3] = 7
% Average size of a generated clause: 3.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] c_in_3 (+)2 (-)0
% [1] c_lessequals_3 (+)2 (-)2
% ------------------
% Total: (+)4 (-)2
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 6
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 10
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 16
% Number of unification failures: 3
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 2
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 11
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 0
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 3
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 0
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 0
% 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: 2
% Number of states in UCFA table: 28
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 30
% 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: 0.93
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 44
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 19
% ConstructUnitClause() = 2
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 0 secs
% CPU time: 0.15 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------