Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
Complexity_C_Integer 2019-03-21 04.38 pair #429989194
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
ChenFlurMukhopadhyay-SAS2012-Ex3.10_true-termination.c
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n142.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
Adapted_from_Stroeder_15
run statistics
property
value
solver
AProVE
configuration
c_complexity
runtime (wallclock)
1.42109 seconds
cpu usage
2.46198
user time
2.26161
system time
0.200366
max virtual memory
1.8400812E7
max residence set size
183620.0
stage attributes
key
value
starexec-result
WORST_CASE(?, O(n^1))
output
2.34/1.38 WORST_CASE(?, O(n^1)) 2.34/1.39 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files/bench.koat 2.34/1.39 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1). 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (0) CpxIntTrs 2.34/1.39 (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 184 ms] 2.34/1.39 (2) BOUNDS(1, n^1) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 ---------------------------------------- 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (0) 2.34/1.39 Obligation: 2.34/1.39 Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_start(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: TRUE 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_x, v_y, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: TRUE 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: v_.0 >= 0 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_.critedge_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: v_.0 < 0 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: v_.0 + v_.01 >= 0 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_.critedge_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: v_.0 + v_.01 < 0 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0 + v_.01 + v_z, -(v_z) - 1, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: TRUE 2.34/1.39 eval_foo_.critedge_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z) -> Com_1(eval_foo_stop(v_.0, v_.01, v_x, v_y, v_z)) :|: TRUE 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 The start-symbols are:[eval_foo_start_5] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 ---------------------------------------- 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) 2.34/1.39 YES(?, 3*ar_1 + 3*ar_3 + 12) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 Initial complexity problem: 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 1: T: 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_1, ar_1, ar_3, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= 0 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoocritedgein(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_0 + 1 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 + ar_2 >= 0 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoocritedgein(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_0 + ar_2 + 1 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0 + ar_2 + ar_4, ar_1, -ar_4 - 1, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoocritedgein(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoostop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 start location: koat_start 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 leaf cost: 0 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 Repeatedly propagating knowledge in problem 1 produces the following problem: 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2: T: 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_1, ar_1, ar_3, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= 0 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoocritedgein(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_0 + 1 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 + ar_2 >= 0 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoocritedgein(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 >= ar_0 + ar_2 + 1 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0 + ar_2 + ar_4, ar_1, -ar_4 - 1, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoocritedgein(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoostop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 start location: koat_start 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 leaf cost: 0 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 A polynomial rank function with 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 Pol(evalfoostart) = 2 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 Pol(evalfoobb0in) = 2 2.34/1.39 2.34/1.39 Pol(evalfoobb1in) = 2 2.34/1.39
popout
output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.
job log
popout
actions
all output
return to Complexity_C_Integer 2019-03-21 04.38