details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	rsd.c
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n109.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	WTC_V2

run statistics

property	value
solver	AProVE
configuration	c_complexity
runtime (wallclock)	2.46720790863 seconds
cpu usage	2.999584127
max memory	3.03878144E8

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	38200
starexec-result	WORST_CASE(?, O(n^1))

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^1)) 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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1). (0) CpxIntTrs (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 483 ms] (2) BOUNDS(1, n^1) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: eval_rsd_start(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb0_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: TRUE eval_rsd_bb0_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb1_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: v_r >= 0 eval_rsd_bb0_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb4_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: v_r < 0 eval_rsd_bb1_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, 2 * v_r, 2 * v_r, v_r)) :|: TRUE eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb3_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: v_da.0 >= v_r eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb4_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: v_da.0 < v_r eval_rsd_bb3_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_3(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: TRUE eval_rsd_3(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_2(eval_nondet_start(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r), eval_rsd_4(nondef.0, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: TRUE eval_rsd_4(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, v_da.0 - 1, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: v_4 > 0 eval_rsd_4(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, v_db.0 - 1, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: v_4 > 0 && v_4 <= 0 eval_rsd_4(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, v_da.0 - 1, v_da.0, v_r)) :|: v_4 <= 0 && v_4 > 0 eval_rsd_4(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_bb2_in(v_4, v_db.0 - 1, v_da.0, v_r)) :|: v_4 <= 0 eval_rsd_bb4_in(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r) -> Com_1(eval_rsd_stop(v_4, v_da.0, v_db.0, v_r)) :|: TRUE The start-symbols are:[eval_rsd_start_4] ---------------------------------------- (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) YES(?, 168*ar_0 + 50) Initial complexity problem: 1: T: (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdstart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= 0 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_0 + 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, 2*ar_0, 2*ar_0, ar_3, ar_4)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_1 >= ar_0 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= ar_1 + 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsd3(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd30(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalnondetstart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd31(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_4, ar_4)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd3(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_2(evalrsd30(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, f), evalrsd31(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, f)) (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_3 >= 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_2 - 1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_3 >= 1 /\ 0 >= ar_3 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_1, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_3 /\ ar_3 >= 1 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_2 - 1, ar_1, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_3 ] (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsdbb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdstop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdstart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 <= 0 ] start location: koat_start leaf cost: 0 Testing for reachability in the complexity graph removes the following transitions from problem 1: evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_2 - 1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_3 >= 1 /\ 0 >= ar_3 ] evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_1, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_3 /\ ar_3 >= 1 ] We thus obtain the following problem: 2: T: (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalrsd4(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalrsdbb2in(ar_0, ar_2 - 1, ar_1, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= 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