Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
Complexity_C_Integer 2019-03-21 04.38 pair #429989204
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
AliasDarteFeautrierGonnord-SAS2010-speedpldi3_true-termination.c
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n002.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
Adapted_from_Stroeder_15
run statistics
property
value
solver
AProVE
configuration
c_complexity
runtime (wallclock)
1.64057 seconds
cpu usage
2.67394
user time
2.46266
system time
0.211286
max virtual memory
1.8442872E7
max residence set size
186456.0
stage attributes
key
value
starexec-result
WORST_CASE(?, O(n^2))
output
2.61/1.61 WORST_CASE(?, O(n^2)) 2.61/1.62 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files/bench.koat 2.61/1.62 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^2). 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (0) CpxIntTrs 2.61/1.62 (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 278 ms] 2.61/1.62 (2) BOUNDS(1, n^2) 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 ---------------------------------------- 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (0) 2.61/1.62 Obligation: 2.61/1.62 Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_start(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(0, 0, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_m > 0 && v_n > v_m 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_m <= 0 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_n <= v_m 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_.0 < v_n 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_.0 >= v_n 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01 + 1, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_.01 < v_m 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0 + 1, v_.01 + 1, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_.01 < v_m && v_.01 >= v_m 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, 0, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_.01 >= v_m && v_.01 < v_m 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0 + 1, 0, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_.01 >= v_m 2.61/1.62 eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_foo_stop(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 The start-symbols are:[eval_foo_start_6] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 ---------------------------------------- 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) 2.61/1.62 YES(?, 2*ar_1 + 2*ar_0*ar_1 + 2*ar_0 + 9) 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 Initial complexity problem: 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 1: T: 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, 0, 0)) [ ar_0 >= 1 /\ ar_1 >= ar_0 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 >= ar_0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_0 >= ar_1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_1 >= ar_2 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_2 >= ar_1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 + 1)) [ ar_0 >= ar_3 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2 + 1, ar_3 + 1)) [ ar_0 >= ar_3 + 1 /\ ar_3 >= ar_0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, 0)) [ ar_3 >= ar_0 /\ ar_0 >= ar_3 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2 + 1, 0)) [ ar_3 >= ar_0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoostop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 start location: koat_start 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 leaf cost: 0 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 Testing for reachability in the complexity graph removes the following transitions from problem 1: 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2 + 1, ar_3 + 1)) [ ar_0 >= ar_3 + 1 /\ ar_3 >= ar_0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, 0)) [ ar_3 >= ar_0 /\ ar_0 >= ar_3 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 We thus obtain the following problem: 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 2: T: 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_2 >= ar_1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2 + 1, 0)) [ ar_3 >= ar_0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 + 1)) [ ar_0 >= ar_3 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoostop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_1 >= ar_2 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ ar_0 >= ar_1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3)) [ 0 >= ar_0 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, 0, 0)) [ ar_0 >= 1 /\ ar_1 >= ar_0 + 1 ] 2.61/1.62 2.61/1.62 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3) -> Com_1(evalfoobb0in(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 Complexity_C_Integer 2019-03-21 04.38