Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
TRS Standard pair #516962897
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
Ex4_4_Luc96b_Z.xml
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n001.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
Transformed_CSR_04
run statistics
property
value
solver
NTI_22
configuration
default
runtime (wallclock)
1.44290304184 seconds
cpu usage
1.671478472
max memory
9.8496512E7
stage attributes
key
value
output-size
2846
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 = 2] f(g(g(_0)),_1) -> f(g(g(_0)),activate(_1)) Let l be the left-hand side and r be the right-hand side of this rule. Let p = epsilon, theta1 = {} and theta2 = {_1->activate(_1)}. We have r|p = f(g(g(_0)),activate(_1)) and theta2(theta1(l)) = theta1(r|p). Hence, the term theta1(l) = f(g(g(_0)),_1) 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 = [f^#(g(_0),_1) -> f^#(_0,n__f(g(_0),activate(_1))), activate^#(n__f(_0,_1)) -> f^#(_0,_1), f^#(g(_0),_1) -> activate^#(_1)] TRS = {f(g(_0),_1) -> f(_0,n__f(g(_0),activate(_1))), f(_0,_1) -> n__f(_0,_1), activate(n__f(_0,_1)) -> f(_0,_1), activate(_0) -> _0} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Failed! ## Trying with polynomial interpretations... Failed! ## 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=true, max=20) # max_depth=20, unfold_variables=false: # Iteration 0: no loop found, 3 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 1: no loop found, 9 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 2: success, found a loop, 5 unfolded rules generated. Here is the successful unfolding. Let IR be the TRS under analysis. L0 = f^#(g(_0),_1) -> f^#(_0,n__f(g(_0),activate(_1))) [trans] is in U_IR^0. D = f^#(g(_0),_1) -> activate^#(_1) is a dependency pair of IR. We build a composed triple from L0 and D. ==> L1 = f^#(g(g(_0)),_1) -> activate^#(n__f(g(g(_0)),activate(_1))) [trans] is in U_IR^1. D = activate^#(n__f(_0,_1)) -> f^#(_0,_1) is a dependency pair of IR. We build a composed triple from L1 and D. ==> L2 = f^#(g(g(_0)),_1) -> f^#(g(g(_0)),activate(_1)) [trans] is in U_IR^2. 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 = 60
popout
output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.
job log
popout
actions
all output
return to TRS Standard