details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	Ex24_GM04.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n112.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Strategy_removed_CSR_05

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_22
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	1.45748305321 seconds
cpu usage	1.763822211
max memory	5.2989952E7

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	3345
starexec-result	NO

output

/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_default /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO ** BEGIN proof argument ** The following rule was generated while unfolding the analyzed TRS: [iteration = 4] f(c,g(c),g(b)) -> f(c,g(c),g(b)) Let l be the left-hand side and r be the right-hand side of this rule. Let p = epsilon, theta1 = {} and theta2 = {}. We have r|p = f(c,g(c),g(b)) and theta2(theta1(l)) = theta1(r|p). Hence, the term theta1(l) = f(c,g(c),g(b)) 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^#(_0,g(_0),_1) -> f^#(_1,_1,_1)] TRS = {f(_0,g(_0),_1) -> f(_1,_1,_1), g(b) -> c, b -> c} ## 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=false, max=-1) # max_depth=2, unfold_variables=false: # Iteration 0: no loop found, 1 unfolded rule generated. # Iteration 1: no loop found, 1 unfolded rule generated. # Iteration 2: no loop found, 0 unfolded rule generated. No loop found at all! # max_depth=2, unfold_variables=true: # Iteration 0: no loop found, 1 unfolded rule generated. # Iteration 1: no loop found, 1 unfolded rule generated. # Iteration 2: no loop found, 2 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 3: no loop found, 2 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 4: success, found a loop, 1 unfolded rule generated. Here is the successful unfolding. Let IR be the TRS under analysis. L0 = f^#(_0,g(_0),_1) -> f^#(_1,_1,_1) [trans] is in U_IR^0. We build a unit triple from L0. ==> L1 = f^#(_0,g(_0),_1) -> f^#(_1,_1,_1) [unit] is in U_IR^1. Let p1 = [0]. We unfold the rule of L1 forwards at position p1 with the rule g(b) -> c. ==> L2 = f^#(_0,g(_0),g(b)) -> f^#(c,g(b),g(b)) [unit] is in U_IR^2. Let p2 = [0]. The subterm at position p2 in the left-hand side of the rule of L2 unifies with the subterm at position p2 in the right-hand side of the rule of L2. ==> L3 = f^#(c,g(c),g(b)) -> f^#(c,g(b),g(b)) [unit] is in U_IR^3. Let p3 = [1, 0]. We unfold the rule of L3 forwards at position p3 with the rule b -> c. ==> L4 = f^#(c,g(c),g(b)) -> f^#(c,g(c),g(b)) [unit] 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 = 18 popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to TRS Standard