details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	quotminus.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n128.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Rubio_04

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_22
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	0.296113014221 seconds
cpu usage	0.239967375
max memory	3.049472E7

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	3068
starexec-result	YES

output

/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_default /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES ** BEGIN proof argument ** All the DP problems were proved finite. As all the involved DP processors are sound, the TRS under analysis terminates. ** 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... ## 3 initial DP problems to solve. ## First, we try to decompose these problems into smaller problems. ## Round 1 [3 DP problems]: ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [quot^#(s(_0),s(_1)) -> quot^#(min(_0,_1),s(_1))] TRS = {plus(0,_0) -> _0, plus(s(_0),_1) -> s(plus(_0,_1)), min(_0,0) -> _0, min(s(_0),s(_1)) -> min(_0,_1), min(min(_0,_1),Z) -> min(_0,plus(_1,Z)), quot(0,s(_0)) -> 0, quot(s(_0),s(_1)) -> s(quot(min(_0,_1),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Failed! ## Trying with polynomial interpretations... This DP problem is too complex! Aborting! ## Trying with lexicographic path orders... The constraints are satisfied by the lexicographic path order using the argument filtering: {min:[0], quot:[0, 1], plus:[0, 1], s:[0], quot^#:[0, 1]} and the precedence: quot > [s, min], plus > [s, min], s > [min] This DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [min^#(s(_0),s(_1)) -> min^#(_0,_1), min^#(min(_0,_1),Z) -> min^#(_0,plus(_1,Z))] TRS = {plus(0,_0) -> _0, plus(s(_0),_1) -> s(plus(_0,_1)), min(_0,0) -> _0, min(s(_0),s(_1)) -> min(_0,_1), min(min(_0,_1),Z) -> min(_0,plus(_1,Z)), quot(0,s(_0)) -> 0, quot(s(_0),s(_1)) -> s(quot(min(_0,_1),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Failed! ## Trying with polynomial interpretations... This DP problem is too complex! Aborting! ## Trying with lexicographic path orders... The constraints are satisfied by the lexicographic path order using the argument filtering: {min:[0], quot:[0, 1], plus:[0, 1], s:[0], min^#:[0]} and the precedence: quot > [min^#, s, min], plus > [min^#, s, min], s > [min^#, min], min > [min^#] This DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [plus^#(s(_0),_1) -> plus^#(_0,_1)] TRS = {plus(0,_0) -> _0, plus(s(_0),_1) -> s(plus(_0,_1)), min(_0,0) -> _0, min(s(_0),s(_1)) -> min(_0,_1), min(min(_0,_1),Z) -> min(_0,plus(_1,Z)), quot(0,s(_0)) -> 0, quot(s(_0),s(_1)) -> s(quot(min(_0,_1),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Success! This DP problem is finite. ## All the DP problems were proved finite. As all the involved DP processors are sound, the TRS under analysis terminates. 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 = 0 popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to TRS Standard