details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	perfect2.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n078.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Mixed_TRS

run statistics

property	value
solver	AProVE
configuration	complexity
runtime (wallclock)	2.05726504326 seconds
cpu usage	5.096172708
max memory	6.19700224E8

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	5637
starexec-result	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)

output

/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?) proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF). (0) CpxTRS (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (2) TRS for Loop Detection (3) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (4) BEST (5) proven lower bound (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) (8) TRS for Loop Detection (9) DecreasingLoopProof [FINISHED, 278 ms] (10) BOUNDS(EXP, INF) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF). The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(0, y) -> 0 minus(s(x), 0) -> s(x) minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y) le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> y perfectp(0) -> false perfectp(s(x)) -> f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x)) f(0, y, 0, u) -> true f(0, y, s(z), u) -> false f(s(x), 0, z, u) -> f(x, u, minus(z, s(x)), u) f(s(x), s(y), z, u) -> if(le(x, y), f(s(x), minus(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u)) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST ---------------------------------------- (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF). The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(0, y) -> 0 minus(s(x), 0) -> s(x) minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y) le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> y perfectp(0) -> false perfectp(s(x)) -> f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x)) f(0, y, 0, u) -> true f(0, y, s(z), u) -> false f(s(x), 0, z, u) -> f(x, u, minus(z, s(x)), u) f(s(x), s(y), z, u) -> if(le(x, y), f(s(x), minus(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u)) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST ---------------------------------------- (3) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1): The rewrite sequence le(s(x), s(y)) ->^+ le(x, y) gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position []. The pumping substitution is [x / s(x), y / s(y)]. The result substitution is [ ]. popout

output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.

job log

popout

actions

all output return to Runti Compl Inner Rewri 22807