TSTP Solution File: SWV283-2 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : SWV283-2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 06:48:47 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.18s
% Output : Refutation 0.18s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP16173/SWV/SWV283-2+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 = 0 secs [nr = 43] [nf = 2] [nu = 27] [ut = 14]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 352] [nf = 4] [nu = 208] [ut = 25]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(x0),tc_nat_0()) | c_lessequals_3(x1,v_xd_1(x1),tc_nat_0())
% B1: ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(x0),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(v_x_0(),x0,tc_nat_0())
% B2: c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(),c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x1)),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x1)),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(),c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% B3: ~c_lessequals_3(c_plus_3(x0,x1,tc_nat_0()),x2,tc_nat_0()) | c_lessequals_3(x0,x2,tc_nat_0())
% B4: ~c_lessequals_3(c_plus_3(x0,x1,tc_nat_0()),x2,tc_nat_0()) | c_lessequals_3(x1,x2,tc_nat_0())
% B5: ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(x0),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(x1,c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(v_sko__upX_1(x1),x0,tc_nat_0())
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U0: < d1 v2 dv1 f1 c1 t4 td2 > c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(x0),tc_nat_0())
% U5: < d1 v3 dv2 f2 c2 t7 td3 > c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x1,x0,tc_nat_0())),tc_nat_0())
% U13: < d1 v3 dv2 f6 c4 t13 td5 > ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x0,v_sko__upX_1(x1),tc_nat_0()))),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(x1,c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U14: < d2 v1 dv1 f4 c4 t9 td4 > ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(),x0,tc_nat_0()))),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% U25: < d3 v0 dv0 f6 c7 t13 td5 > c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(),v_sko__upX_1(v_xc_0()),tc_nat_0()))),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(),c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0())
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U0:
% c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(x0),tc_nat_0()) | c_lessequals_3(x1,v_xd_1(x1),tc_nat_0()) ....... B0
% c_lessequals_3(x0, v_xd_1(x0), tc_nat_0()) ....... R1 [B0:L0, B0:L1]
% Derivation of unit clause U5:
% ~c_lessequals_3(c_plus_3(x0,x1,tc_nat_0()),x2,tc_nat_0()) | c_lessequals_3(x1,x2,tc_nat_0()) ....... B4
% c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(x0),tc_nat_0()) ....... U0
% c_lessequals_3(x0, v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x1, x0, tc_nat_0())), tc_nat_0()) ....... R1 [B4:L0, U0:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U13:
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(x0),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(x1,c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(v_sko__upX_1(x1),x0,tc_nat_0()) ....... B5
% c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x1,x0,tc_nat_0())),tc_nat_0()) ....... U5
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x0, v_sko__upX_1(x1), tc_nat_0()))), c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(x1, c_emptyset_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B5:L1, U5:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U14:
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(x0),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(v_x_0(),x0,tc_nat_0()) ....... B1
% ~c_lessequals_3(c_plus_3(x0,x1,tc_nat_0()),x2,tc_nat_0()) | c_lessequals_3(x0,x2,tc_nat_0()) ....... B3
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(x0), c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | ~c_lessequals_3(c_plus_3(v_x_0(), x1, tc_nat_0()), x0, tc_nat_0()) ....... R1 [B1:L1, B3:L1]
% c_lessequals_3(x0,v_xd_1(x0),tc_nat_0()) ....... U0
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(), x0, tc_nat_0()))), c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L1, U0:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U25:
% c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(),c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x1)),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x1)),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(),c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... B2
% c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)), c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)), c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(), c_emptyset_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(x0)), c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(), c_emptyset_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R1 [B2:L0, B2:L2]
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(),x0,tc_nat_0()))),c_Event_Oused_1(v_list_0()),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U14
% c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(), x0, tc_nat_0()))), c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(), c_emptyset_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) | c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(), x0, tc_nat_0()))), c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(), c_emptyset_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, U14:L0]
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x0,v_sko__upX_1(x1),tc_nat_0()))),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(x1,c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U13
% c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(), v_sko__upX_1(v_xc_0()), tc_nat_0()))), c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(), c_emptyset_0(), tc_Message_Omsg_0())), tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... R3 [R2:L0, U13:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(v_x_0(),v_sko__upX_1(v_xc_0()),tc_nat_0()))),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(v_xc_0(),c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U25
% ~c_in_3(c_Message_Omsg_ONonce_1(v_xd_1(c_plus_3(x0,v_sko__upX_1(x1),tc_nat_0()))),c_Message_Oparts_1(c_insert_3(x1,c_emptyset_0(),tc_Message_Omsg_0())),tc_Message_Omsg_0()) ....... U13
% [] ....... R1 [U25:L0, U13:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 795
% resolvents: 784 factors: 11
% Number of unit clauses generated: 320
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 40.25
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [1] = 14 [2] = 11 [3] = 1
% Total = 26
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 320 [2] = 474 [3] = 1
% Average size of a generated clause: 2.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] c_in_3 (+)1 (-)10
% [1] c_lessequals_3 (+)15 (-)0
% ------------------
% Total: (+)16 (-)10
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 26
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 0
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 0
% Number of successful unifications: 803
% Number of unification failures: 24
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 3
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 1027
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 174
% 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: 195
% N unit clauses dropped because too much nesting: 171
% 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: 13
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 5
% Number of states in UCFA table: 168
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 283
% Max allowed number of states in UCFA: 136000
% Ratio n states used/total allowed states: 0.00
% Ratio n states used/total unit clauses terms: 0.59
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 49
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 827
% ConstructUnitClause() = 221
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 0 secs
% CPU time: 0.17 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------