Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
Logic Progr 19030 pair #381919669
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
permute1.pl
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n050.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
talp_mixed
run statistics
property
value
solver
AProVE
configuration
standard
runtime (wallclock)
2.03117513657 seconds
cpu usage
4.950736275
max memory
4.51342336E8
stage attributes
key
value
output-size
23742
starexec-result
YES
output
/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.pl /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.pl # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty Left Termination of the query pattern perm(g,a) w.r.t. the given Prolog program could successfully be proven: (0) Prolog (1) PrologToPiTRSProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (2) PiTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) PiDP (5) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) AND (7) PiDP (8) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (9) PiDP (10) PiDPToQDPProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (11) QDP (12) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (13) YES (14) PiDP (15) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (16) PiDP (17) PiDPToQDPProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (18) QDP (19) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) YES (21) PiDP (22) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (23) PiDP (24) PiDPToQDPProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (25) QDP (26) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (27) QDP (28) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (29) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Clauses: app1(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) :- app1(Xs, Ys, Zs). app1([], Ys, Ys). app2(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) :- app2(Xs, Ys, Zs). app2([], Ys, Ys). perm(Xs, .(X, Ys)) :- ','(app2(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs), ','(app1(X1s, X2s, Zs), perm(Zs, Ys))). perm([], []). Query: perm(g,a) ---------------------------------------- (1) PrologToPiTRSProof (SOUND) We use the technique of [TOCL09]. With regard to the inferred argument filtering the predicates were used in the following modes: perm_in_2: (b,f) app2_in_3: (f,f,b) app1_in_3: (b,b,f) Transforming Prolog into the following Term Rewriting System: Pi-finite rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) -> U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app2_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) app2_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) -> U2_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app2_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) app2_in_aag([], Ys, Ys) -> app2_out_aag([], Ys, Ys) U2_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app2_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) -> app2_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app2_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) -> U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, X1s, X2s, app1_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) app1_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) -> U1_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app1_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) app1_in_gga([], Ys, Ys) -> app1_out_gga([], Ys, Ys) U1_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app1_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) -> app1_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, X1s, X2s, app1_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) -> U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys)) perm_in_ga([], []) -> perm_out_ga([], []) U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) -> perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping: perm_in_ga(x1, x2) = perm_in_ga(x1) U3_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_ga(x4) app2_in_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app2_in_aag(x3) .(x1, x2) = .(x2)
popout
output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.
job log
popout
actions
all output
return to Logic Progr 19030