details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	Ex1_Zan97.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n116.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Strategy_removed_CSR_05

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_22
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	0.347300052643 seconds
cpu usage	0.395691286
max memory	4.2237952E7

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	2798
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 pattern rule was generated by the strategy presented in Sect. 3 of [Emmes, Enger, Giesl, IJCAR'12]: [iteration = 2] g(d){}^n{} -> g(d){}^n{} We apply Theorem 8 of [Emmes, Enger, Giesl, IJCAR'12] on this rule with m = 1, b = 0, pi = epsilon, sigma' = {} and mu' = {}. Hence the term g(d), obtained from instantiating n with 0 in the left-hand side of the rule, starts an infinite derivation 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 = [g^#(_0) -> h^#(_0), h^#(d) -> g^#(c)] TRS = {g(_0) -> h(_0), c -> d, h(d) -> g(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 prove non-looping nontermination # Iteration 0: non-looping nontermination not proved, 2 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 1: non-looping nontermination not proved, 4 unfolded rules generated. # Iteration 2: success, non-looping nontermination proved, 3 unfolded rules generated. Here is the successful unfolding. Let IR be the TRS under analysis. IR contains the dependency pair g^#(_0) -> h^#(_0). We apply (I) of [Emmes, Enger, Giesl, IJCAR'12] to this dependency pair. ==> P0 = g^#(_0){}^n{} -> h^#(_0){}^n{} is in U_IR^0. We apply (VI) of [Emmes, Enger, Giesl, IJCAR'12] to this pattern rule at position epsilon using the pattern rule h(d){}^n{} -> g(c){}^n{} obtained from IR. ==> P1 = g^#(d){}^n{} -> g(c){}^n{} is in U_IR^1. We apply (IX) of [Emmes, Enger, Giesl, IJCAR'12] to this pattern rule at position [0] using the rule c -> d of IR. ==> P2 = g^#(d){}^n{} -> g(d){}^n{} 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 = 13 popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to TRS Standard