details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	p-56.koat
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n090.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	T2

run statistics

property	value
solver	AProVE
configuration	complexity
runtime (wallclock)	2.20881 seconds
cpu usage	4.59027
user time	4.32602
system time	0.264251
max virtual memory	1.8645304E7
max residence set size	219524.0

stage attributes

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

output

4.35/2.16 WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), O(n^1)) 4.54/2.17 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat 4.54/2.17 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1). 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (0) CpxIntTrs 4.54/2.17 (1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 127 ms] 4.54/2.17 (2) BOUNDS(1, n^1) 4.54/2.17 (3) Loat Proof [FINISHED, 531 ms] 4.54/2.17 (4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 ---------------------------------------- 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (0) 4.54/2.17 Obligation: 4.54/2.17 Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: 4.54/2.17 f2(A, B, C, D, E) -> Com_1(f1(A, F, C, D, E)) :|: 1 >= A 4.54/2.17 f2(A, B, C, D, E) -> Com_1(f300(A, B, C, D, E)) :|: A >= 2 && C >= 2 4.54/2.17 f300(A, B, C, D, E) -> Com_1(f1(A, F, C, D, E)) :|: D + 1 >= 0 4.54/2.17 f300(A, B, C, D, E) -> Com_1(f300(A, B, C, 1 + D, 1 + E)) :|: E >= 0 && 0 >= 2 + D 4.54/2.17 f300(A, B, C, D, E) -> Com_1(f300(A, B, C, 1 + D, 1 + E)) :|: 0 >= 2 + E && 0 >= 2 + D 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 The start-symbols are:[f2_5] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 ---------------------------------------- 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (1) Koat Proof (FINISHED) 4.54/2.17 YES(?, 2*ar_3 + 3) 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 Initial complexity problem: 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 1: T: 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f1(ar_0, f, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 1 >= ar_0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= 2 /\ ar_2 >= 2 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f1(ar_0, f, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_3 + 1 >= 0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 + 1, ar_4 + 1)) [ ar_4 >= 0 /\ 0 >= ar_3 + 2 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 + 1, ar_4 + 1)) [ 0 >= ar_4 + 2 /\ 0 >= ar_3 + 2 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 start location: koat_start 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 leaf cost: 0 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 Repeatedly propagating knowledge in problem 1 produces the following problem: 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 2: T: 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f1(ar_0, f, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 1 >= ar_0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= 2 /\ ar_2 >= 2 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f1(ar_0, f, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_3 + 1 >= 0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 + 1, ar_4 + 1)) [ ar_4 >= 0 /\ 0 >= ar_3 + 2 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: ?, Cost: 1) f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3 + 1, ar_4 + 1)) [ 0 >= ar_4 + 2 /\ 0 >= ar_3 + 2 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: 1, Cost: 0) koat_start(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 0 <= 0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 start location: koat_start 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 leaf cost: 0 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 A polynomial rank function with 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 Pol(f2) = 1 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 Pol(f1) = 0 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 Pol(f300) = 1 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 Pol(koat_start) = 1 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 orients all transitions weakly and the transition 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f1(ar_0, f, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_3 + 1 >= 0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 strictly and produces the following problem: 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 3: T: 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f1(ar_0, f, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ 1 >= ar_0 ] 4.54/2.17 4.54/2.17 (Comp: 1, Cost: 1) f2(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4) -> Com_1(f300(ar_0, ar_1, ar_2, ar_3, ar_4)) [ ar_0 >= 2 /\ ar_2 >= 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