Spaces
Explore
Communities
Statistics
Reports
Cluster
Status
Help
TRS Standard pair #516967427
details
property
value
status
complete
benchmark
TypeEx3.xml
ran by
Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout
1200 seconds
wallclock timeout
300 seconds
memory limit
137438953472 bytes
execution host
n087.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space
Applicative_05
run statistics
property
value
solver
NTI_22
configuration
default
runtime (wallclock)
0.5635638237 seconds
cpu usage
0.737776807
max memory
5.2064256E7
stage attributes
key
value
output-size
2622
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 = 0] app(app(_0,0),_1) -> app(app(cons,0),nil) Let l be the left-hand side and r be the right-hand side of this rule. Let p = epsilon, theta1 = {} and theta2 = {_0->cons, _1->nil}. We have r|p = app(app(cons,0),nil) and theta2(theta1(l)) = theta1(r|p). Hence, the term theta1(l) = app(app(_0,0),_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 = [app^#(app(_0,0),_1) -> app^#(app(hd,app(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,0),nil))),_1), app^#(app(_0,0),_1) -> app^#(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,0),nil)), app^#(app(_0,0),_1) -> app^#(app(cons,0),nil), app^#(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,_1),_2)) -> app^#(app(cons,app(_0,_1)),app(app(map,_0),_2)), app^#(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,_1),_2)) -> app^#(_0,_1), app^#(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,_1),_2)) -> app^#(app(map,_0),_2)] TRS = {app(app(_0,0),_1) -> app(app(hd,app(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,0),nil))),_1), app(app(map,_0),nil) -> nil, app(app(map,_0),app(app(cons,_1),_2)) -> app(app(cons,app(_0,_1)),app(app(map,_0),_2))} ## 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=5, unfold_variables=false: # Iteration 0: success, found a loop, 3 unfolded rules generated. Here is the successful unfolding. Let IR be the TRS under analysis. L0 = app^#(app(_0,0),_1) -> app^#(app(cons,0),nil) [trans] is in U_IR^0. 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 = 6
popout
output may be truncated. 'popout' for the full output.
job log
popout
actions
all output
return to TRS Standard