details

property	value
status	complete
benchmark	2.42.xml
ran by	Akihisa Yamada
cpu timeout	1200 seconds
wallclock timeout	300 seconds
memory limit	137438953472 bytes
execution host	n150.star.cs.uiowa.edu
space	SK90

run statistics

property	value
solver	NTI_23
configuration	default
runtime (wallclock)	0.303187847137 seconds
cpu usage	0.421173856
max memory	3.8166528E7

stage attributes

key	value
output-size	3610
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... ## 3 initial DP problems to solve. ## First, we try to decompose these problems into smaller problems. ## Round 1 [3 DP problems]: ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [rev^#(++(_0,_1)) -> rev^#(_1), rev^#(++(_0,_1)) -> rev^#(_0)] TRS = {flatten(nil) -> nil, flatten(unit(_0)) -> flatten(_0), flatten(++(_0,_1)) -> ++(flatten(_0),flatten(_1)), flatten(++(unit(_0),_1)) -> ++(flatten(_0),flatten(_1)), flatten(flatten(_0)) -> flatten(_0), rev(nil) -> nil, rev(unit(_0)) -> unit(_0), rev(++(_0,_1)) -> ++(rev(_1),rev(_0)), rev(rev(_0)) -> _0, ++(_0,nil) -> _0, ++(nil,_0) -> _0, ++(++(_0,_1),_2) -> ++(_0,++(_1,_2))} ## 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. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [flatten^#(unit(_0)) -> flatten^#(_0), flatten^#(++(_0,_1)) -> flatten^#(_0), flatten^#(++(_0,_1)) -> flatten^#(_1), flatten^#(++(unit(_0),_1)) -> flatten^#(_0), flatten^#(++(unit(_0),_1)) -> flatten^#(_1), flatten^#(flatten(_0)) -> flatten^#(_0)] TRS = {flatten(nil) -> nil, flatten(unit(_0)) -> flatten(_0), flatten(++(_0,_1)) -> ++(flatten(_0),flatten(_1)), flatten(++(unit(_0),_1)) -> ++(flatten(_0),flatten(_1)), flatten(flatten(_0)) -> flatten(_0), rev(nil) -> nil, rev(unit(_0)) -> unit(_0), rev(++(_0,_1)) -> ++(rev(_1),rev(_0)), rev(rev(_0)) -> _0, ++(_0,nil) -> _0, ++(nil,_0) -> _0, ++(++(_0,_1),_2) -> ++(_0,++(_1,_2))} ## 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. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [++^#(++(_0,_1),_2) -> ++^#(_0,++(_1,_2)), ++^#(++(_0,_1),_2) -> ++^#(_1,_2)] TRS = {flatten(nil) -> nil, flatten(unit(_0)) -> flatten(_0), flatten(++(_0,_1)) -> ++(flatten(_0),flatten(_1)), flatten(++(unit(_0),_1)) -> ++(flatten(_0),flatten(_1)), flatten(flatten(_0)) -> flatten(_0), rev(nil) -> nil, rev(unit(_0)) -> unit(_0), rev(++(_0,_1)) -> ++(rev(_1),rev(_0)), rev(rev(_0)) -> _0, ++(_0,nil) -> _0, ++(nil,_0) -> _0, ++(++(_0,_1),_2) -> ++(_0,++(_1,_2))} ## DP Processor: homeomorphic embeddings. Using no argument filtering, i.e., applying the processor to the full problem only. Failed! ## DP Processor: lexicographic path orders. Using no argument filtering, i.e., applying the processor to the full problem only. Lexicographic path order induced by the precedence: unit > [++, flatten], rev > [++], ++^# > [++], flatten > [++] Success, finiteness proved! 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 3.10.0-1160.62.1.el7.x86_64 for amd64 using Java version 1.8.0_322 ** 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