TSTP Solution File: MGT036-3 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : MGT036-3 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : add_equality
% Format : carine
% Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000
% Computer : art03.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 01:57:30 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 31.00s
% Output : Refutation 31.00s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP7048/MGT/MGT036-3+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 = 2] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 4]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 10] [nf = 0] [nu = 3] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 21] [nf = 1] [nu = 6] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 51] [nf = 2] [nu = 20] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 5 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 92] [nf = 10] [nu = 34] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 6 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 196] [nf = 18] [nu = 85] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 7 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 337] [nf = 55] [nu = 136] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 8 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 679] [nf = 92] [nu = 306] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 9 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 1140] [nf = 232] [nu = 476] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 10 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 2228] [nf = 372] [nu = 1019] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 11 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 3689] [nf = 853] [nu = 1562] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 12 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 7079] [nf = 1334] [nu = 3256] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 13 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 11620] [nf = 2902] [nu = 4950] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 14 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 22044] [nf = 4470] [nu = 10161] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 15 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 35985] [nf = 9427] [nu = 15372] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 16 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 67767] [nf = 14384] [nu = 31262] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 17 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 110228] [nf = 29764] [nu = 47152] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 18 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 206596] [nf = 45144] [nu = 95335] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 19 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 335257] [nf = 92305] [nu = 143518] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 20 ...
% t = 1 secs [nr = 626407] [nf = 139466] [nu = 289092] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 21 ...
% t = 2 secs [nr = 1014948] [nf = 282994] [nu = 434666] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 22 ...
% t = 3 secs [nr = 1892492] [nf = 426522] [nu = 873437] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 23 ...
% t = 5 secs [nr = 3063233] [nf = 861199] [nu = 1312208] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 24 ...
% t = 9 secs [nr = 5704055] [nf = 1295876] [nu = 2632618] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 25 ...
% t = 15 secs [nr = 9226516] [nf = 2608096] [nu = 3953028] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 26 ...
% t = 28 secs [nr = 17165364] [nf = 3920316] [nu = 7922451] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 27 ...
% Entering time slice 2
% Updating parameters ... done.
% Looking for a proof at depth = 1 ...
% t = 31 secs [nr = 19175079] [nf = 4671194] [nu = 8675907] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 31 secs [nr = 19175093] [nf = 4671194] [nu = 8675910] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% t = 31 secs [nr = 19175130] [nf = 4671198] [nu = 8675913] [ut = 5]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~environment_1(x0) | ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),x1) | ~subpopulations_4(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),x0,x1)
% B1: environment_1(sk1_0())
% B5: ~environment_1(x0) | ~subpopulations_4(x1,x2,x0,x3) | subpopulations_4(x2,x1,x0,x3)
% B8: ~environment_1(x0) | ~greater_2(zero_0(),growth_rate_2(x1,x3)) | ~greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(x2,x3),zero_0()) | ~subpopulations_4(x1,x2,x0,x3) | outcompetes_3(x2,x1,x3)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U0: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c1 t1 td1 b > environment_1(sk1_0())
% U1: < d0 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 b > greater_2(zero_0(),growth_rate_2(efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0()))
% U2: < d0 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 b > greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(first_movers_0(),sk2_0()),zero_0())
% U3: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c4 t4 td1 b > subpopulations_4(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk1_0(),sk2_0())
% U4: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c4 t4 td1 > subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(),first_movers_0(),sk1_0(),sk2_0())
% U5: < d4 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 > ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0())
% U6: < d4 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 > outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0())
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U0:
% environment_1(sk1_0()) ....... U0
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% greater_2(zero_0(),growth_rate_2(efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0())) ....... U1
% Derivation of unit clause U2:
% greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(first_movers_0(),sk2_0()),zero_0()) ....... U2
% Derivation of unit clause U3:
% subpopulations_4(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk1_0(),sk2_0()) ....... U3
% Derivation of unit clause U4:
% environment_1(sk1_0()) ....... B1
% ~environment_1(x0) | ~subpopulations_4(x1,x2,x0,x3) | subpopulations_4(x2,x1,x0,x3) ....... B5
% ~subpopulations_4(x0, x1, sk1_0(), x2) | subpopulations_4(x1, x0, sk1_0(), x2) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B5:L0]
% subpopulations_4(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk1_0(),sk2_0()) ....... U3
% subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(), first_movers_0(), sk1_0(), sk2_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U3:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U5:
% ~environment_1(x0) | ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),x1) | ~subpopulations_4(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),x0,x1) ....... B0
% ~environment_1(x0) | ~subpopulations_4(x1,x2,x0,x3) | subpopulations_4(x2,x1,x0,x3) ....... B5
% ~environment_1(x0) | ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(), efficient_producers_0(), x1) | ~environment_1(x0) | ~subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(), first_movers_0(), x0, x1) ....... R1 [B0:L2, B5:L2]
% ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(), efficient_producers_0(), x0) | ~environment_1(x1) | ~subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(), first_movers_0(), x1, x0) ....... R2 [R1:L0, R1:L2]
% environment_1(sk1_0()) ....... U0
% ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(), efficient_producers_0(), x0) | ~subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(), first_movers_0(), sk1_0(), x0) ....... R3 [R2:L1, U0:L0]
% subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(),first_movers_0(),sk1_0(),sk2_0()) ....... U4
% ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(), efficient_producers_0(), sk2_0()) ....... R4 [R3:L1, U4:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U6:
% environment_1(sk1_0()) ....... B1
% ~environment_1(x0) | ~greater_2(zero_0(),growth_rate_2(x1,x3)) | ~greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(x2,x3),zero_0()) | ~subpopulations_4(x1,x2,x0,x3) | outcompetes_3(x2,x1,x3) ....... B8
% ~greater_2(zero_0(), growth_rate_2(x0, x1)) | ~greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(x2, x1), zero_0()) | ~subpopulations_4(x0, x2, sk1_0(), x1) | outcompetes_3(x2, x0, x1) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B8:L0]
% greater_2(zero_0(),growth_rate_2(efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0())) ....... U1
% ~greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(x0, sk2_0()), zero_0()) | ~subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(), x0, sk1_0(), sk2_0()) | outcompetes_3(x0, efficient_producers_0(), sk2_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U1:L0]
% greater_or_equal_2(growth_rate_2(first_movers_0(),sk2_0()),zero_0()) ....... U2
% ~subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(), first_movers_0(), sk1_0(), sk2_0()) | outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(), efficient_producers_0(), sk2_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U2:L0]
% subpopulations_4(efficient_producers_0(),first_movers_0(),sk1_0(),sk2_0()) ....... U4
% outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(), efficient_producers_0(), sk2_0()) ....... R4 [R3:L0, U4:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0()) ....... U6
% ~outcompetes_3(first_movers_0(),efficient_producers_0(),sk2_0()) ....... U5
% [] ....... R1 [U6:L0, U5:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 23846387
% resolvents: 19175188 factors: 4671199
% Number of unit clauses generated: 8675934
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 36.38
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 4 [2] = 1 [4] = 2
% Total = 7
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 8675934 [2] = 10463820 [3] = 4706549 [4] = 64 [5] = 20
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] environment_1 (+)1 (-)0
% [1] greater_2 (+)1 (-)0
% [2] greater_or_equal_2 (+)1 (-)0
% [3] outcompetes_3 (+)1 (-)1
% [4] subpopulations_4 (+)2 (-)0
% ------------------
% Total: (+)6 (-)1
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 7
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 5784536
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 23846397
% Number of unification failures: 16
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 0
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 23427037
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 24
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 56
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 3969442
% 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: 4
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 2
% Number of states in UCFA table: 25
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 23
% 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: 1.09
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 45
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 23846413
% ConstructUnitClause() = 3969445
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 4.56 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: 769238
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 31 secs
% CPU time: 31.00 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------