details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	improved_usable.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n173.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	AProVE_04

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_23
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	0.573913097382 seconds
cpu usage	1.452754418
max memory	7.456768E7

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	2095
starexec-result	"MAYBE"

output

/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_default /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MAYBE ** 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 = [f^#(a,h(_0)) -> f^#(g(_0),h(_0))] TRS = {f(a,h(_0)) -> f(g(_0),h(_0)), h(g(_0)) -> h(a), g(h(_0)) -> g(_0), h(h(_0)) -> _0} ## DP Processor: homeomorphic embeddings. Using no argument filtering, i.e., applying the processor to the full problem only. Failed! ## DP Processor: lexicographic path orders. Failed! ## DP Processor: polynomial interpretations. Failed! ## DP Processor: Knuth-Bendix orders. Failed! All the DP processors have failed! Don't know whether this DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [g^#(h(_0)) -> g^#(_0)] TRS = {f(a,h(_0)) -> f(g(_0),h(_0)), h(g(_0)) -> h(a), g(h(_0)) -> g(_0), h(h(_0)) -> _0} ## DP Processor: homeomorphic embeddings. Using no argument filtering, i.e., applying the processor to the full problem only. Success, finiteness proved! This DP problem is finite. ## A DP problem could not be proved finite. ## Now, we try to prove that this problem is infinite. Failed! ## Could not solve the following DP problems: 1: Dependency pairs = [f^#(a,h(_0)) -> f^#(g(_0),h(_0))] TRS = {f(a,h(_0)) -> f(g(_0),h(_0)), h(g(_0)) -> h(a), g(h(_0)) -> g(_0), h(h(_0)) -> _0} Hence, could not prove (non)termination of the TRS under analysis. Proof run on Linux version 3.10.0-1160.62.1.el7.x86_64 for amd64 using Java version 1.8.0_322 ** END proof description ** Total number of generated unfolded rules = 218 popout

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

job log

popout

actions

all output return to TRS Standard