TSTP Solution File: LCL077-2 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : LCL077-2 : 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 : Sat Nov 27 23:50:05 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 10.68s
% Output : Refutation 10.68s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP21680/LCL/LCL077-2+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 = 1 secs [nr = 10] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 4]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 2 secs [nr = 11332] [nf = 2] [nu = 4214] [ut = 2774]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% t = 2 secs [nr = 31879] [nf = 62] [nu = 17585] [ut = 2774]
% 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(not_1(not_1(a_0())),a_0()))
% B2: is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0)))
% B3: is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),implies_2(x1,x0)))
% B4: ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x1,x2)) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(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 v7 dv3 f6 c0 t13 td4 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x2)),implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x2))))
% U3: < d0 v4 dv2 f5 c0 t9 td4 b > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),implies_2(x1,x0)))
% U32: < d2 v3 dv2 f3 c0 t6 td3 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(x0),implies_2(x0,x1)))
% U98: < d2 v4 dv2 f3 c0 t7 td3 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x0)))
% U1565: < d2 v6 dv2 f9 c0 t15 td5 > is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),x1),implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),x0)))
% U12524: < d4 v5 dv3 f7 c2 t14 td5 > ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x0)),implies_2(implies_2(not_1(a_0()),x2),a_0())))
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x2)),implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% Derivation of unit clause U3:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... U3
% Derivation of unit clause U32:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... B2
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x1,x2)) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x2)) ....... B4
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), x2)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x1, x2)) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B4:L1]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... U3
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(x0), implies_2(x0, x1))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U3:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U98:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... B2
% ~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(implies_2(x0, implies_2(x1, x0)), x2)) | is_a_theorem_1(x2) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B5:L0]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x2)),implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), implies_2(x0, x0))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U1565:
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),implies_2(x1,x0))) ....... B3
% ~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(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), not_1(x1)), implies_2(x1, x0)), x2)) | is_a_theorem_1(x2) ....... R1 [B3:L0, B5:L0]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,implies_2(x1,x2)),implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), not_1(x1)), x1), implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0), not_1(x1)), x0))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U12524:
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(not_1(a_0())),a_0())) ....... B0
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x1,x2)) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x1)) | is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0,x2)) ....... B4
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, a_0())) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(not_1(a_0())), x0)) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B4: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(not_1(not_1(a_0())), x0)) | ~is_a_theorem_1(x1) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x1, implies_2(x0, a_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, B5:L2]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(not_1(x0),implies_2(x0,x1))) ....... U32
% ~is_a_theorem_1(x0) | ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(x0, implies_2(implies_2(not_1(a_0()), x1), a_0()))) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U32:L0]
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x0))) ....... U98
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0, x1), implies_2(x0, x0)), implies_2(implies_2(not_1(a_0()), x2), a_0()))) ....... R4 [R3:L0, U98:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% ~is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(x0,x1),implies_2(x0,x0)),implies_2(implies_2(not_1(a_0()),x2),a_0()))) ....... U12524
% is_a_theorem_1(implies_2(implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),x1),implies_2(implies_2(not_1(x0),not_1(x1)),x0))) ....... U1565
% [] ....... R1 [U12524:L0, U1565:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 149720
% resolvents: 149649 factors: 71
% Number of unit clauses generated: 132500
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 88.50
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 4 [2] = 2770 [4] = 9751
% Total = 12525
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 132500 [2] = 17149 [3] = 71
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] is_a_theorem_1 (+)1376 (-)11149
% ------------------
% Total: (+)1376 (-)11149
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 12525
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 5810
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 149730
% Number of unification failures: 7676879
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 15340860
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 110
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 0
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 115464
% Max entries in substitution set: 15
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 106395
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 14686
% 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: 51
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 10
% Number of states in UCFA table: 83966
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 347780
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.16
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.24
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 38
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 7826609
% ConstructUnitClause() = 118916
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.19 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: 14972
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 11 secs
% CPU time: 10.67 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------