/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).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, 127 ms] (2) BOUNDS(INF, INF) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f1(A, B, K, L, M, F, G, H, I, J)) :|: B >= 1 + A f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f300(A, B, K, L, E, M, G, H, I, J)) :|: A >= B f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, K, L, M, N)) :|: TRUE The start-symbols are:[f2_10] ---------------------------------------- (1) Loat Proof (FINISHED) ### Pre-processing the ITS problem ### Initial linear ITS problem Start location: f2 0: f1 -> f1 : C'=free_2, D'=free, E'=free_1, [ A>=1+B ], cost: 1 1: f1 -> f300 : C'=free_5, D'=free_3, F'=free_4, [ B>=A ], cost: 1 2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [], cost: 1 Removed unreachable and leaf rules: Start location: f2 0: f1 -> f1 : C'=free_2, D'=free, E'=free_1, [ A>=1+B ], cost: 1 2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [], cost: 1 ### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ### Accelerating simple loops of location 0. Accelerating the following rules: 0: f1 -> f1 : C'=free_2, D'=free, E'=free_1, [ A>=1+B ], 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: f2 3: f1 -> [3] : [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF 2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [], cost: 1 Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules): Start location: f2 2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [], cost: 1 4: f2 -> [3] : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost): Start location: f2 4: f2 -> [3] : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF ### Computing asymptotic complexity ### Fully simplified ITS problem Start location: f2 4: f2 -> [3] : G'=free_9, H'=free_6, Q'=free_7, J'=free_8, [ A>=1+B ], 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+B ] NO ---------------------------------------- (2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)