/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat
# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty


The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).

(0) CpxIntTrs
(1) Loat Proof [FINISHED, 116 ms]
(2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)


----------------------------------------

(0)
Obligation:
Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules:
f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f2(A, K, L, M, N, O, G, H, I, J)) :|: A >= 1
f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f300(A, K, L, D, E, F, M, H, I, J)) :|: 0 >= A
f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, K, L, K)) :|: TRUE

The start-symbols are:[f1_10]


----------------------------------------

(1) Loat Proof (FINISHED)


### Pre-processing the ITS problem ###



Initial linear ITS problem

   Start location: f1

      0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_3, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, F'=free_4, [ A>=1 ], cost: 1

      1: f2 -> f300 : B'=free_7, C'=free_5, G'=free_6, [ 0>=A ], cost: 1

      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1



Removed unreachable and leaf rules:

   Start location: f1

      0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_3, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, F'=free_4, [ A>=1 ], cost: 1

      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1



### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ###



Accelerating simple loops of location 0.

   Accelerating the following rules:

      0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_3, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, F'=free_4, [ A>=1 ], cost: 1



   Accelerated rule 0 with NONTERM, yielding the new rule 3.

   Removing the simple loops: 0.



Accelerated all simple loops using metering functions (where possible):

   Start location: f1

      3: f2 -> [3] : [ A>=1 ], cost: INF

      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1



Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules):

   Start location: f1

      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1

      4: f1 -> [3] : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [ A>=1 ], cost: INF



Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost):

   Start location: f1

      4: f1 -> [3] : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [ A>=1 ], cost: INF



### Computing asymptotic complexity ###



Fully simplified ITS problem

   Start location: f1

      4: f1 -> [3] : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [ A>=1 ], cost: INF



Computing asymptotic complexity for rule 4

   Resulting cost INF has complexity: Nonterm



Found new complexity Nonterm.



Obtained the following overall complexity (w.r.t. the length of the input n):

   Complexity:  Nonterm

   Cpx degree:  Nonterm

   Solved cost: INF

   Rule cost:   INF

   Rule guard:  [ A>=1 ]



NO


----------------------------------------

(2)
BOUNDS(INF, INF)