%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CARINE---0.734
% Problem  : PLA020-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm  : add_equality
% Format   : carine
% Command  : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000

% Computer : art09.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 03:47:32 EST 2010

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.28s
% Output   : Refutation 0.28s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP21704/PLA/PLA020-1+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 = 125] [nf = 0] [nu = 46] [ut = 38]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% 	t = 1 secs [nr = 43138] [nf = 2] [nu = 35057] [ut = 3541]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% +================================================+
% |                                                |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% |                                                |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: ~holds_2(clear_1(d_0()),x0)
% B29: ~holds_2(empty_0(),x2) | ~holds_2(clear_1(x1),x2) | ~holds_2(on_2(x1,x0),x2) | holds_2(clear_1(x0),do_2(pickup_1(x1),x2))
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U12: < d0 v0 dv0 f0 c2 t2 td1 b > holds_2(empty_0(),s0_0())
% U15: < d0 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 b > holds_2(clear_1(c_0()),s0_0())
% U18: < d0 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 b > holds_2(on_2(c_0(),d_0()),s0_0())
% U3544: < d3 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > ~holds_2(on_2(c_0(),d_0()),s0_0())
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U12:
% holds_2(empty_0(),s0_0()) ....... U12
% Derivation of unit clause U15:
% holds_2(clear_1(c_0()),s0_0()) ....... U15
% Derivation of unit clause U18:
% holds_2(on_2(c_0(),d_0()),s0_0()) ....... U18
% Derivation of unit clause U3544:
% ~holds_2(clear_1(d_0()),x0) ....... B0
% ~holds_2(empty_0(),x2) | ~holds_2(clear_1(x1),x2) | ~holds_2(on_2(x1,x0),x2) | holds_2(clear_1(x0),do_2(pickup_1(x1),x2)) ....... B29
%  ~holds_2(empty_0(), x0) | ~holds_2(clear_1(x1), x0) | ~holds_2(on_2(x1, d_0()), x0) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B29:L3]
%  holds_2(empty_0(),s0_0()) ....... U12
%   ~holds_2(clear_1(x0), s0_0()) | ~holds_2(on_2(x0, d_0()), s0_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U12:L0]
%   holds_2(clear_1(c_0()),s0_0()) ....... U15
%    ~holds_2(on_2(c_0(), d_0()), s0_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U15:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% ~holds_2(on_2(c_0(),d_0()),s0_0()) ....... U3544
% holds_2(on_2(c_0(),d_0()),s0_0()) ....... U18
%  [] ....... R1 [U3544:L0, U18:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% |                Statistics                 |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 43319
% 	resolvents: 43313	factors: 6
% Number of unit clauses generated: 35214
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 81.29
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 20	[1] = 18	[2] = 3503	[3] = 4		
% Total = 3545
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 35214	[2] = 8068	[3] = 37	
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] differ_2		(+)20	(-)0
% [1] holds_2		(+)3518	(-)7
% 			------------------
% 		Total:	(+)3538	(-)7
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 3545
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 671
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% 	because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 43322
% Number of unification failures: 5448
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 21115
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 78358
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 328
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 6
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 31452
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 20960
% 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: 12
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 5
% Number of states in UCFA table: 7719
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 38162
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 112000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.07
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.20
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 50
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 48770
% ConstructUnitClause() = 34977
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.04 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% |                                                      |
%   Inferences per sec: inf
% |                                                      |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 1 secs
% CPU time: 0.28 secs
% 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------