TSTP Solution File: SYN082-1 by CARINE---0.734
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CARINE---0.734
% Problem : SYN082-1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : add_equality
% Format : carine
% Command : carine %s t=%d xo=off uct=32000
% Computer : art07.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 08:29:48 EST 2010
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s
% Output : Refutation 0.14s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP23026/SYN/SYN082-1+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 = 0 secs [nr = 0] [nf = 0] [nu = 0] [ut = 0]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 2 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 15] [nf = 8] [nu = 0] [ut = 0]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 3 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 48] [nf = 42] [nu = 0] [ut = 0]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 4 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 200] [nf = 96] [nu = 0] [ut = 0]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 5 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 552] [nf = 170] [nu = 0] [ut = 0]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 6 ...
% t = 0 secs [nr = 1936] [nf = 484] [nu = 42] [ut = 1]
% Looking for a proof at depth = 7 ...
% +================================================+
% | |
% | Congratulations!!! ........ A proof was found. |
% | |
% +================================================+
% Base Clauses and Unit Clauses used in proof:
% ============================================
% Base Clauses:
% -------------
% B0: big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(),b_0())
% B3: ~big_f_2(x0,b_0()) | big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(x0,f_1(a_0()))
% B4: ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0)
% Unit Clauses:
% --------------
% U0: < d6 v0 dv0 f0 c2 t2 td1 > big_f_2(a_0(),b_0())
% U1: < d7 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 > ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()),b_0())
% U2: < d7 v0 dv0 f1 c2 t3 td2 > big_f_2(g_1(b_0()),b_0())
% --------------- Start of Proof ---------------
% Derivation of unit clause U0:
% ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0) ....... B4
% ~big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(g_1(f_1(a_0())), f_1(a_0())) ....... R1 [B4:L0, B4:L1]
% big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... B0
% big_f_2(g_1(f_1(a_0())), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) ....... R2 [R1:L0, B0:L0]
% ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | ~big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0) ....... B7
% big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) ....... R3 [R2:L0, B7:L2]
% big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) ....... R4 [R3:L2, R3:L1]
% big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... B0
% big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) | big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) ....... R5 [R4:L1, B0:L0]
% big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) ....... R6 [R5:L0, R5:L1]
% Derivation of unit clause U1:
% big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... B0
% ~big_f_2(x0,b_0()) | big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(x0,f_1(a_0())) ....... B3
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) ....... R1 [B0:L1, B3:L0]
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, R1:L1]
% ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | ~big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0) ....... B7
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), x0) | ~big_f_2(g_1(x0), x0) ....... R3 [R2:L0, B7:L0]
% big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U0
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) ....... R4 [R3:L1, U0:L0]
% ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | ~big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0) ....... B7
% ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), x0) | ~big_f_2(g_1(x0), x0) ....... R5 [R4:L0, B7:L0]
% ~big_f_2(a_0(), b_0()) | ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) ....... R6 [R5:L0, R5:L2]
% big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U0
% ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) ....... R7 [R6:L0, U0:L0]
% Derivation of unit clause U2:
% big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... B0
% ~big_f_2(x0,b_0()) | big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(x0,f_1(a_0())) ....... B3
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) ....... R1 [B0:L1, B3:L0]
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) ....... R2 [R1:L0, R1:L2]
% ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0) ....... B4
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0), x0) ....... R3 [R2:L0, B4:L0]
% big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U0
% big_f_2(a_0(), f_1(a_0())) | big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) ....... R4 [R3:L1, U0:L0]
% ~big_f_2(a_0(),f_1(a_0())) | ~big_f_2(a_0(),x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0),x0) ....... B4
% big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) | ~big_f_2(a_0(), x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0), x0) ....... R5 [R4:L0, B4:L0]
% ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()),b_0()) ....... U1
% ~big_f_2(a_0(), x0) | big_f_2(g_1(x0), x0) ....... R6 [R5:L0, U1:L0]
% big_f_2(a_0(),b_0()) ....... U0
% big_f_2(g_1(b_0()), b_0()) ....... R7 [R6:L0, U0:L0]
% Derivation of the empty clause:
% big_f_2(g_1(b_0()),b_0()) ....... U2
% ~big_f_2(g_1(b_0()),b_0()) ....... U1
% [] ....... R1 [U2:L0, U1:L0]
% --------------- End of Proof ---------------
% PROOF FOUND!
% ---------------------------------------------
% | Statistics |
% ---------------------------------------------
% Profile 3: Performance Statistics:
% ==================================
% Total number of generated clauses: 2679
% resolvents: 2165 factors: 514
% Number of unit clauses generated: 48
% % unit clauses generated to total clauses generated: 1.79
% Number of unit clauses constructed and retained at depth [x]:
% =============================================================
% [6] = 1 [7] = 2
% Total = 3
% Number of generated clauses having [x] literals:
% ------------------------------------------------
% [1] = 48 [2] = 1005 [3] = 1626
% Average size of a generated clause: 3.0
% Number of unit clauses per predicate list:
% ==========================================
% [0] big_f_2 (+)2 (-)1
% ------------------
% Total: (+)2 (-)1
% Total number of unit clauses retained: 3
% Number of clauses skipped because of their length: 2639
% N base clauses skippped in resolve-with-all-base-clauses
% because of the shortest resolvents table: 536
% Number of successful unifications: 2699
% Number of unification failures: 1054
% Number of unit to unit unification failures: 1
% N literal unification failure due to lookup root_id table: 7461
% N base clause resolution failure due to lookup table: 609
% N UC-BCL resolution dropped due to lookup table: 0
% Max entries in substitution set: 4
% N unit clauses dropped because they exceeded max values: 42
% 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: 3
% Max term depth in a unit clause: 2
% Number of states in UCFA table: 10
% Total number of terms of all unit clauses in table: 8
% 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: 1.25
% Number of symbols (columns) in UCFA: 39
% Profile 2: Number of calls to:
% ==============================
% PTUnify() = 3753
% ConstructUnitClause() = 45
% Profile 1: Time spent in:
% =========================
% ConstructUnitClause() : 0.00 secs
% --------------------------------------------------------
% | |
% Inferences per sec: inf
% | |
% --------------------------------------------------------
% Elapsed time: 0 secs
% CPU time: 0.14 secs
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------