details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	Ex4_4_Luc96b_FR.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n192.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Transformed_CSR_04

run statistics

property	value
solver	AProVE
configuration	standard
runtime (wallclock)	3.03974 seconds
cpu usage	8.46296
user time	8.09918
system time	0.363778
max virtual memory	1.8549668E7
max residence set size	535080.0

stage attributes

key	value
starexec-result	NO

output

NO proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven: (0) QTRS (1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QDP (3) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QDP (5) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 54 ms] (6) QDP (7) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 35 ms] (8) QDP (9) TransformationProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) QDP (11) NonTerminationLoopProof [COMPLETE, 36 ms] (12) NO ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(X), Y) -> f(X, n__f(n__g(X), activate(Y))) f(X1, X2) -> n__f(X1, X2) g(X) -> n__g(X) activate(n__f(X1, X2)) -> f(activate(X1), X2) activate(n__g(X)) -> g(activate(X)) activate(X) -> X Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: F(g(X), Y) -> F(X, n__f(n__g(X), activate(Y))) F(g(X), Y) -> ACTIVATE(Y) ACTIVATE(n__f(X1, X2)) -> F(activate(X1), X2) ACTIVATE(n__f(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVATE(X1) ACTIVATE(n__g(X)) -> G(activate(X)) ACTIVATE(n__g(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(X), Y) -> f(X, n__f(n__g(X), activate(Y))) f(X1, X2) -> n__f(X1, X2) g(X) -> n__g(X) activate(n__f(X1, X2)) -> f(activate(X1), X2) activate(n__g(X)) -> g(activate(X)) activate(X) -> X Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: F(g(X), Y) -> ACTIVATE(Y) ACTIVATE(n__f(X1, X2)) -> F(activate(X1), X2) F(g(X), Y) -> F(X, n__f(n__g(X), activate(Y))) ACTIVATE(n__f(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVATE(X1) ACTIVATE(n__g(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(X), Y) -> f(X, n__f(n__g(X), activate(Y))) f(X1, X2) -> n__f(X1, X2) g(X) -> n__g(X) activate(n__f(X1, X2)) -> f(activate(X1), X2) activate(n__g(X)) -> g(activate(X)) activate(X) -> X Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to TRS Standard