details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	ExIntrod_GM01_Z.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n170.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Transformed_CSR_04

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_22
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	3.01412701607 seconds
cpu usage	5.26684604
max memory	5.921792E8

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	4002
starexec-result	NO

output

/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_default /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO ** BEGIN proof argument ** The following rule was generated while unfolding the analyzed TRS: [iteration = 4] adx(cons(_0,n__zeros)) -> adx(cons(0,n__zeros)) Let l be the left-hand side and r be the right-hand side of this rule. Let p = epsilon, theta1 = {} and theta2 = {_0->0}. We have r|p = adx(cons(0,n__zeros)) and theta2(theta1(l)) = theta1(r|p). Hence, the term theta1(l) = adx(cons(_0,n__zeros)) loops w.r.t. the analyzed TRS. ** END proof argument ** ** BEGIN proof description ** ## Searching for a generalized rewrite rule (a rule whose right-hand side contains a variable that does not occur in the left-hand side)... No generalized rewrite rule found! ## Applying the DP framework... ## 1 initial DP problem to solve. ## First, we try to decompose this problem into smaller problems. ## Round 1 [1 DP problem]: ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [incr^#(cons(_0,_1)) -> activate^#(_1), activate^#(n__incr(_0)) -> incr^#(_0), adx^#(cons(_0,_1)) -> incr^#(cons(_0,n__adx(activate(_1)))), activate^#(n__adx(_0)) -> adx^#(_0), adx^#(cons(_0,_1)) -> activate^#(_1)] TRS = {incr(nil) -> nil, incr(cons(_0,_1)) -> cons(s(_0),n__incr(activate(_1))), adx(nil) -> nil, adx(cons(_0,_1)) -> incr(cons(_0,n__adx(activate(_1)))), nats -> adx(zeros), zeros -> cons(0,n__zeros), head(cons(_0,_1)) -> _0, tail(cons(_0,_1)) -> activate(_1), incr(_0) -> n__incr(_0), adx(_0) -> n__adx(_0), zeros -> n__zeros, activate(n__incr(_0)) -> incr(_0), activate(n__adx(_0)) -> adx(_0), activate(n__zeros) -> zeros, activate(_0) -> _0} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Failed! ## Trying with polynomial interpretations... This DP problem is too complex! Aborting! ## Trying with lexicographic path orders... Failed! ## Trying with Knuth-Bendix orders... Failed! Don't know whether this DP problem is finite. ## A DP problem could not be proved finite. ## Now, we try to prove that this problem is infinite. ## Trying to find a loop (forward=true, backward=false, max=-1) # max_depth=4, unfold_variables=false: # Iteration 0: no loop found, 5 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 1: no loop found, 16 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 2: no loop found, 26 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 3: no loop found, 57 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 4: success, found a loop, 37 unfolded rules generated. Here is the successful unfolding. Let IR be the TRS under analysis. L0 = adx^#(cons(_0,_1)) -> incr^#(cons(_0,n__adx(activate(_1)))) [trans] is in U_IR^0. D = incr^#(cons(_0,_1)) -> activate^#(_1) is a dependency pair of IR. We build a composed triple from L0 and D. ==> L1 = [adx^#(cons(_0,_1)) -> incr^#(cons(_0,n__adx(activate(_1)))), incr^#(cons(_2,_3)) -> activate^#(_3)] [comp] is in U_IR^1. Let p1 = [0, 1, 0]. We unfold the first rule of L1 forwards at position p1 with the rule activate(n__zeros) -> zeros. ==> L2 = [adx^#(cons(_0,n__zeros)) -> incr^#(cons(_0,n__adx(zeros))), incr^#(cons(_1,_2)) -> activate^#(_2)] [comp] is in U_IR^2. Let p2 = [0, 1, 0]. We unfold the first rule of L2 forwards at position p2 with the rule zeros -> cons(0,n__zeros). ==> L3 = adx^#(cons(_0,n__zeros)) -> activate^#(n__adx(cons(0,n__zeros))) [trans] is in U_IR^3. D = activate^#(n__adx(_0)) -> adx^#(_0) is a dependency pair of IR. We build a composed triple from L3 and D. ==> L4 = adx^#(cons(_0,n__zeros)) -> adx^#(cons(0,n__zeros)) [trans] is in U_IR^4. This DP problem is infinite. Proof run on Linux version 3.10.0-1160.25.1.el7.x86_64 for amd64 using Java version 1.8.0_292 ** END proof description ** Total number of generated unfolded rules = 362 popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to TRS Standard