details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	secret1.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n135.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	Secret_07_TRS

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_22
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	0.211812019348 seconds
cpu usage	0.303461316
max memory	3.6540416E7

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	3156
starexec-result	YES

output

/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_default /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/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... ## 2 initial DP problems to solve. ## First, we try to decompose these problems into smaller problems. ## Round 1 [2 DP problems]: ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [D^#(b(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(b(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_1), D^#(c(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(c(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_1), D^#(m(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(m(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_1), D^#(opp(_0)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(div(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(div(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_1), D^#(ln(_0)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(pow(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_0), D^#(pow(_0,_1)) -> D^#(_1)] TRS = {D(t) -> s(h), D(constant) -> h, D(b(_0,_1)) -> b(D(_0),D(_1)), D(c(_0,_1)) -> b(c(_1,D(_0)),c(_0,D(_1))), D(m(_0,_1)) -> m(D(_0),D(_1)), D(opp(_0)) -> opp(D(_0)), D(div(_0,_1)) -> m(div(D(_0),_1),div(c(_0,D(_1)),pow(_1,2))), D(ln(_0)) -> div(D(_0),_0), D(pow(_0,_1)) -> b(c(c(_1,pow(_0,m(_1,1))),D(_0)),c(c(pow(_0,_1),ln(_0)),D(_1))), b(h,_0) -> _0, b(_0,h) -> _0, b(s(_0),s(_1)) -> s(s(b(_0,_1))), b(b(_0,_1),_2) -> b(_0,b(_1,_2))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Success! This DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [b^#(s(_0),s(_1)) -> b^#(_0,_1), b^#(b(_0,_1),_2) -> b^#(_0,b(_1,_2)), b^#(b(_0,_1),_2) -> b^#(_1,_2)] TRS = {D(t) -> s(h), D(constant) -> h, D(b(_0,_1)) -> b(D(_0),D(_1)), D(c(_0,_1)) -> b(c(_1,D(_0)),c(_0,D(_1))), D(m(_0,_1)) -> m(D(_0),D(_1)), D(opp(_0)) -> opp(D(_0)), D(div(_0,_1)) -> m(div(D(_0),_1),div(c(_0,D(_1)),pow(_1,2))), D(ln(_0)) -> div(D(_0),_0), D(pow(_0,_1)) -> b(c(c(_1,pow(_0,m(_1,1))),D(_0)),c(c(pow(_0,_1),ln(_0)),D(_1))), b(h,_0) -> _0, b(_0,h) -> _0, b(s(_0),s(_1)) -> s(s(b(_0,_1))), b(b(_0,_1),_2) -> b(_0,b(_1,_2))} ## 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: {opp:[0], m:[0, 1], ln:[0], b:[0, 1], c:[0, 1], s:[0], div:[1], pow:[0, 1], D:[0], b^#:[0, 1]} and the precedence: b^# > [b, s], ln > [m, 1, div, pow, 2], b > [s], t > [h, s], div > [m, 1, pow, 2], pow > [m, 1], constant > [h], D > [opp, m, ln, b, c, 1, div, pow, s, 2] 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