details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	speed_pldi09_fig4_4.c.koat
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n140.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Flores-Montoya_16

run statistics

property	value
solver	AProVE
configuration	complexity
runtime (wallclock)	2.21641 seconds
cpu usage	9.72696
user time	9.11647
system time	0.610489
max virtual memory	1.8712356E7
max residence set size	222692.0

stage attributes

key	value
starexec-result	WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), O(n^1))

output

4.76/2.19 WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), O(n^1)) 4.76/2.20 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat 4.76/2.20 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1). 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (0) CpxIntTrs 4.76/2.20 (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 315 ms] 4.76/2.20 (2) BOUNDS(1, n^1) 4.76/2.20 (3) Loat Proof [FINISHED, 510 ms] 4.76/2.20 (4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 ---------------------------------------- 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (0) 4.76/2.20 Obligation: 4.76/2.20 Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: 4.76/2.20 eval_start_start(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb0_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb0_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_0(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_0(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_1(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_1(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_2(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_2(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_3(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_3(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb1_in(v_n, v_m, v_n)) :|: 0 < v_m 4.76/2.20 eval_start_3(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb4_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: 0 >= v_m 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb1_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb2_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_i_0 > 0 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb1_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb3_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_i_0 <= 0 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb2_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb1_in(v_i_0 - 1, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_i_0 < v_m 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb2_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_bb1_in(v_i_0 - v_m, v_m, v_n)) :|: v_i_0 >= v_m 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb3_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_stop(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_bb4_in(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_8(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_8(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_9(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 eval_start_9(v_i_0, v_m, v_n) -> Com_1(eval_start_stop(v_i_0, v_m, v_n)) :|: TRUE 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 The start-symbols are:[eval_start_start_3] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 ---------------------------------------- 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) 4.76/2.20 YES(?, 6*ar_2 + 14) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 Initial complexity problem: 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 1: T: 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartstart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart0(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart0(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart1(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart1(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart3(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart3(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb1in(ar_0, ar_2, ar_2)) [ ar_0 >= 1 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart3(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 0 >= ar_0 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ ar_1 >= 1 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb1in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 0 >= ar_1 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb1in(ar_0, ar_1 - 1, ar_2)) [ ar_0 >= ar_1 + 1 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb2in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb1in(ar_0, ar_1 - ar_0, ar_2)) [ ar_1 >= ar_0 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb3in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartstop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstartbb4in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart8(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart8(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart9(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) evalstart9(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartstop(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartstart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 start location: koat_start 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 leaf cost: 0 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 Repeatedly propagating knowledge in problem 1 produces the following problem: 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 2: T: 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalstartstart(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstartbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalstartbb0in(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart0(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalstart0(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart1(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalstart1(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) 4.76/2.20 4.76/2.20 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) evalstart2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2) -> Com_1(evalstart3(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2)) popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to Complexity_ITS 2019-03-21 04.46