Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
Compl C Integ Progr 85445 pair #381745666
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
perfect1.c
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n096.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
WTC_V2
run statistics
property
value
solver
AProVE
configuration
c_complexity
runtime (wallclock)
1.92710900307 seconds
cpu usage
3.091806856
max memory
3.51801344E8
stage attributes
key
value
output-size
60412
starexec-result
WORST_CASE(?, O(n^2))
output
/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_c_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.c /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(?, O(n^2)) proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files/bench.koat # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^2). (0) CpxIntTrs (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 683 ms] (2) BOUNDS(1, n^2) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: eval_perfect1_start(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb0_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: TRUE eval_perfect1_bb0_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb7_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_x <= 1 eval_perfect1_bb0_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb1_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_x > 1 eval_perfect1_bb1_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb2_in(v_x, v_x - 1, v_y2.1, v_x)) :|: TRUE eval_perfect1_bb2_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb3_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_x, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y1.0 > 0 eval_perfect1_bb2_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb6_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y1.0 <= 0 eval_perfect1_bb3_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb4_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y2.1 >= v_y1.0 eval_perfect1_bb3_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb5_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y2.1 < v_y1.0 eval_perfect1_bb4_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb3_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1 - v_y1.0, v_y3.0)) :|: TRUE eval_perfect1_bb5_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb2_in(v_x, v_y1.0 - 1, v_y2.1, v_y3.0 - v_y1.0)) :|: v_y2.1 >= 0 && v_y2.1 <= 0 eval_perfect1_bb5_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb2_in(v_x, v_y1.0 - 1, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y2.1 < 0 eval_perfect1_bb5_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb2_in(v_x, v_y1.0 - 1, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y2.1 > 0 eval_perfect1_bb6_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb7_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y3.0 < 0 eval_perfect1_bb6_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb7_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y3.0 > 0 eval_perfect1_bb6_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_bb7_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: v_y3.0 >= 0 && v_y3.0 <= 0 eval_perfect1_bb7_in(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0) -> Com_1(eval_perfect1_stop(v_x, v_y1.0, v_y2.1, v_y3.0)) :|: TRUE The start-symbols are:[eval_perfect1_start_4] ---------------------------------------- (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) YES(?, 19*ar_0 + 8*ar_0^2 + 30) Initial complexity problem: 1: T: (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb7in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 1 >= ar_0 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_0 >= 2 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb2in(ar_0, ar_0 - 1, ar_0, ar_3)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_0)) [ ar_1 >= 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb6in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 >= ar_1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_3 >= ar_1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_1 >= ar_3 + 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 - ar_1)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb2in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_2 - ar_1, ar_3)) [ ar_3 = 0 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb2in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 >= ar_3 + 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb2in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_3 >= 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb6in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb7in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 >= ar_2 + 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb6in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb7in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_2 >= 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb6in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb7in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_2 = 0 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalperfect1bb7in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1stop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 <= 0 ] start location: koat_start leaf cost: 0 Repeatedly propagating knowledge in problem 1 produces the following problem: 2: T: (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalperfect1start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalperfect1bb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3))
popout
output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.
job log
popout
actions
all output
return to Compl C Integ Progr 85445