Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
Complexity_C_Integer 2019-03-21 04.38 pair #429989440
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
AliasDarteFeautrierGonnord-SAS2010-wcet2_true-termination.c
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n103.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
Adapted_from_Stroeder_15
run statistics
property
value
solver
AProVE
configuration
c_complexity
runtime (wallclock)
1.36041 seconds
cpu usage
2.23228
user time
2.04817
system time
0.184108
max virtual memory
1.833918E7
max residence set size
180072.0
stage attributes
key
value
starexec-result
WORST_CASE(?, O(n^1))
output
2.02/1.30 WORST_CASE(?, O(n^1)) 2.02/1.31 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files/bench.koat 2.02/1.31 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1). 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (0) CpxIntTrs 2.02/1.31 (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 77 ms] 2.02/1.31 (2) BOUNDS(1, n^1) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 ---------------------------------------- 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (0) 2.02/1.31 Obligation: 2.02/1.31 Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_start(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: TRUE 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb0_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_i, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: TRUE 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, 0, v_i, v_j)) :|: v_.0 < 5 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb5_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: v_.0 >= 5 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: v_.0 > 2 && v_.01 <= 9 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb4_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: v_.0 <= 2 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb4_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: v_.01 > 9 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb3_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb2_in(v_.0, v_.01 + 1, v_i, v_j)) :|: TRUE 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb4_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_bb1_in(v_.0 + 1, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: TRUE 2.02/1.31 eval_foo_bb5_in(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j) -> Com_1(eval_foo_stop(v_.0, v_.01, v_i, v_j)) :|: TRUE 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 The start-symbols are:[eval_foo_start_4] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 ---------------------------------------- 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) 2.02/1.31 YES(?, 56*ar_1 + 258) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 Initial complexity problem: 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 1: T: 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_1, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, 0)) [ 4 >= ar_0 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_0 >= 5 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_0 >= 3 /\ 9 >= ar_2 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 2 >= ar_0 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_2 >= 10 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2 + 1)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0 + 1, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoostop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 start location: koat_start 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 leaf cost: 0 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 Repeatedly propagating knowledge in problem 1 produces the following problem: 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 2: T: 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalfoobb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_1, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, 0)) [ 4 >= ar_0 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_0 >= 5 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_0 >= 3 /\ 9 >= ar_2 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 2 >= ar_0 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_2 >= 10 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2 + 1)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoobb1in(ar_0 + 1, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalfoobb5in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoostop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalfoostart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 start location: koat_start 2.02/1.31 2.02/1.31 leaf cost: 0 2.02/1.31
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