TSTP Solution File: SWV244-2 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : SWV244-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : Sun Nov 28 06:36:49 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.40s
% Output : Refutation 0.40s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP9636/SWV/SWV244-2+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 = 383] [nf = 0] [nu = 368] [ut = 257]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% B1: ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% B2: ~c_in_3(x0,x1,x2) | c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x1,x3,x2),x2)
% B3: ~c_in_3(x0,x1,x2) | c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x3,x1,x2),x2)
% B4: ~c_in_3(x0,x1,tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(x0,c_Message_Oanalz_1(x1),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% B5: ~c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x1,x2,x3),x3) | c_in_3(x0,x2,x3) | c_in_3(x0,x1,x3)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U5: < d1 v0 dv0 f2 c5 t7 td3 > ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U6: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c3 t4 td2 > ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U256: < d1 v0 dv0 f1 c5 t6 td2 > ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U257: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 > c_in_3(v_X_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U261: < d2 v0 dv0 f6 c11 t17 td5 > ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U568: < d2 v0 dv0 f0 c3 t3 td1 > ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U5:
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... B1
% ~c_in_3(x0,x1,x2) | c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x1,x3,x2),x2) ....... B2
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(), c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B2:L1]
% Derivation of unit clause U6:
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... B1
% ~c_in_3(x0,x1,x2) | c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x3,x1,x2),x2) ....... B3
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(), c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B3:L1]
% Derivation of unit clause U256:
% ~c_in_3(x0,x1,tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(x0,c_Message_Oanalz_1(x1),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... B4
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U5
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(), c_union_3(v_G_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B4:L1, U5:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U257:
% c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... B0
% ~c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x1,x2,x3),x3) | c_in_3(x0,x2,x3) | c_in_3(x0,x1,x3) ....... B5
% c_in_3(v_X_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(v_X_0(), c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B5:L0]
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U6
% c_in_3(v_X_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U6:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U261:
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... B1
% ~c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x1,x2,x3),x3) | c_in_3(x0,x2,x3) | c_in_3(x0,x1,x3) ....... B5
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(), c_union_3(x0, c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(v_X_0(), x0, tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L0, B5:L1]
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U256
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(), c_union_3(c_union_3(v_G_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0()), c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U256:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U568:
% ~c_in_3(x0,x1,x2) | c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x1,x3,x2),x2) ....... B2
% ~c_in_3(x0,x1,x2) | c_in_3(x0,c_union_3(x3,x1,x2),x2) ....... B3
% c_in_3(x0, c_union_3(c_union_3(x1, x2, x3), x4, x3), x3) | ~c_in_3(x0, x2, x3) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B3:L1]
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),c_union_3(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),c_union_3(c_Message_Oanalz_1(c_union_3(v_G_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),c_Message_Osynth_1(v_G_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U261
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(), v_H_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U261:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% ~c_in_3(v_X_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U568
% c_in_3(v_X_0(),v_H_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U257
% [] ....... R1 [U568:L0, U257:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 2298
% resolvents: 2298 factors: 0
% Number of unit clauses generated: 2242
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 97.56
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [0] = 2 [1] = 255 [2] = 312
% Total = 569
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 2242 [2] = 56
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] c_in_3 (+)511 (-)58
% ------------------
% Total: (+)511 (-)58
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 569
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 9
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 2307
% Number of unification failures: 129
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 29380
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 408
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 2
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 8
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 1362
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 937
% 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: 55
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 10
% Number of states in UCFA table: 7334
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 12950
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 528000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.01
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.57
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 42
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 2436
% ConstructUnitClause() = 1929
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.01 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 1 secs
% CPU time: 0.38 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------