TSTP Solution File: LCL188-1 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : LCL188-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : add_equality
% Format : carine
% Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000
% Computer : art11.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz @ 3000MHz
% Memory : 2006MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Sun Nov 28 00:20:18 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.36s
% Output : Refutation 0.36s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP26578/LCL/LCL188-1+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 = 17] [nf = 0] [nu = 10] [ut = 12]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~theorem_1(or_2(p_0(),or_2(not_1(or_2(p_0(),q_0())),q_0())))
% B3: axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),or_2(x1,x0)))
% B5: axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0))
% B6: ~axiom_1(x0) | theorem_1(x0)
% B7: ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x2)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2),x1)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x1))
% B8: ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x1),x0)) | ~theorem_1(x1) | theorem_1(x0)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U1: < d0 v6 dv3 f6 c0 t12 td5 b > axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(x1,x2))),or_2(x1,or_2(x0,x2))))
% U9: < d1 v3 dv1 f3 c0 t6 td4 > theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0))
% U12: < d2 v0 dv0 f4 c4 t8 td4 > ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(p_0(),q_0())),or_2(p_0(),q_0())))
% U23: < d2 v2 dv1 f2 c0 t4 td3 > theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x0))
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(x1,x2))),or_2(x1,or_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% Derivation of unit clause U9:
% axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0)) ....... B5
% ~axiom_1(x0) | theorem_1(x0) ....... B6
% theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0, x0)), x0)) ....... R1 [B5:L0, B6:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U12:
% ~theorem_1(or_2(p_0(),or_2(not_1(or_2(p_0(),q_0())),q_0()))) ....... B0
% ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x1),x0)) | ~theorem_1(x1) | theorem_1(x0) ....... B8
% ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0), or_2(p_0(), or_2(not_1(or_2(p_0(), q_0())), q_0())))) | ~theorem_1(x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B8:L2]
% axiom_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,or_2(x1,x2))),or_2(x1,or_2(x0,x2)))) ....... U1
% ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(p_0(), q_0())), or_2(p_0(), q_0()))) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U23:
% axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),or_2(x1,x0))) ....... B3
% ~axiom_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x2)) | ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x2),x1)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x1)) ....... B7
% ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0, x1)), x2)) | theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x1), x2)) ....... R1 [B3:L0, B7:L0]
% theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(x0,x0)),x0)) ....... U9
% theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0), x0)) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U9:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% theorem_1(or_2(not_1(x0),x0)) ....... U23
% ~theorem_1(or_2(not_1(or_2(p_0(),q_0())),or_2(p_0(),q_0()))) ....... U12
% [] ....... R1 [U23:L0, U12:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 34
% resolvents: 34 factors: 0
% Number of unit clauses generated: 24
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 70.59
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 6 [1] = 6 [2] = 12
% Total = 24
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 24 [2] = 10
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] axiom_1 (+)5 (-)6
% [1] theorem_1 (+)8 (-)5
% ------------------
% Total: (+)13 (-)11
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 24
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 4
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 39
% Number of unification failures: 1
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 66
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 25
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 3
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 5
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 4
% 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: 24
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 7
% Number of states in UCFA table: 175
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 261
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.00
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.67
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 40
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 40
% ConstructUnitClause() = 22
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 1 secs
% CPU time: 0.34 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------