Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
Runtime_Complexity_Full_Rewriting 2019-04-01 06.11 pair #433308467
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
aprove02.xml
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n175.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
Secret_07_TRS
run statistics
property
value
solver
AProVE
configuration
complexity
runtime (wallclock)
291.517 seconds
cpu usage
318.156
user time
316.127
system time
2.02863
max virtual memory
1.8279384E7
max residence set size
5339164.0
stage attributes
key
value
starexec-result
WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), ?)
output
318.05/291.48 WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), ?) 318.05/291.49 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml 318.05/291.49 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 (0) CpxTRS 318.05/291.49 (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] 318.05/291.49 (2) TRS for Loop Detection 318.05/291.49 (3) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] 318.05/291.49 (4) BEST 318.05/291.49 (5) proven lower bound 318.05/291.49 (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] 318.05/291.49 (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) 318.05/291.49 (8) TRS for Loop Detection 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 (0) 318.05/291.49 Obligation: 318.05/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 plus(x, y) -> ifPlus(isZero(x), x, inc(y)) 318.05/291.49 ifPlus(true, x, y) -> p(y) 318.05/291.49 ifPlus(false, x, y) -> plus(p(x), y) 318.05/291.49 times(x, y) -> timesIter(0, x, y, 0) 318.05/291.49 timesIter(i, x, y, z) -> ifTimes(ge(i, x), i, x, y, z) 318.05/291.49 ifTimes(true, i, x, y, z) -> z 318.05/291.49 ifTimes(false, i, x, y, z) -> timesIter(inc(i), x, y, plus(z, y)) 318.05/291.49 isZero(0) -> true 318.05/291.49 isZero(s(0)) -> false 318.05/291.49 isZero(s(s(x))) -> isZero(s(x)) 318.05/291.49 inc(0) -> s(0) 318.05/291.49 inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) 318.05/291.49 inc(x) -> s(x) 318.05/291.49 p(0) -> 0 318.05/291.49 p(s(x)) -> x 318.05/291.49 p(s(s(x))) -> s(p(s(x))) 318.05/291.49 ge(x, 0) -> true 318.05/291.49 ge(0, s(y)) -> false 318.05/291.49 ge(s(x), s(y)) -> ge(x, y) 318.05/291.49 f0(0, y, x) -> f1(x, y, x) 318.05/291.49 f1(x, y, z) -> f2(x, y, z) 318.05/291.49 f2(x, 1, z) -> f0(x, z, z) 318.05/291.49 f0(x, y, z) -> d 318.05/291.49 f1(x, y, z) -> c 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 S is empty. 318.05/291.49 Rewrite Strategy: FULL 318.05/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) 318.05/291.49 Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem. 318.05/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 (2) 318.05/291.49 Obligation: 318.05/291.49 Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 plus(x, y) -> ifPlus(isZero(x), x, inc(y)) 318.05/291.49 ifPlus(true, x, y) -> p(y) 318.05/291.49 ifPlus(false, x, y) -> plus(p(x), y) 318.05/291.49 times(x, y) -> timesIter(0, x, y, 0) 318.05/291.49 timesIter(i, x, y, z) -> ifTimes(ge(i, x), i, x, y, z) 318.05/291.49 ifTimes(true, i, x, y, z) -> z 318.05/291.49 ifTimes(false, i, x, y, z) -> timesIter(inc(i), x, y, plus(z, y)) 318.05/291.49 isZero(0) -> true 318.05/291.49 isZero(s(0)) -> false 318.05/291.49 isZero(s(s(x))) -> isZero(s(x)) 318.05/291.49 inc(0) -> s(0) 318.05/291.49 inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) 318.05/291.49 inc(x) -> s(x) 318.05/291.49 p(0) -> 0 318.05/291.49 p(s(x)) -> x 318.05/291.49 p(s(s(x))) -> s(p(s(x))) 318.05/291.49 ge(x, 0) -> true 318.05/291.49 ge(0, s(y)) -> false 318.05/291.49 ge(s(x), s(y)) -> ge(x, y) 318.05/291.49 f0(0, y, x) -> f1(x, y, x) 318.05/291.49 f1(x, y, z) -> f2(x, y, z) 318.05/291.49 f2(x, 1, z) -> f0(x, z, z) 318.05/291.49 f0(x, y, z) -> d 318.05/291.49 f1(x, y, z) -> c 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 S is empty. 318.05/291.49 Rewrite Strategy: FULL 318.05/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 318.05/291.49 318.05/291.49 (3) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) 318.05/291.49 The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1):
popout
output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.
job log
popout
actions
all output
return to Runtime_Complexity_Full_Rewriting 2019-04-01 06.11
