/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files


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


WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), O(n^1))
proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty


The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1).

(0) CpxTRS
(1) NestedDefinedSymbolProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(2) CpxTRS
    (3) RelTrsToTrsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
    (4) CpxTRS
    (5) CpxTrsMatchBoundsTAProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
    (6) BOUNDS(1, n^1)
(7) RenamingProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
(8) CpxTRS
    (9) TypeInferenceProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
    (10) typed CpxTrs
    (11) OrderProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
    (12) typed CpxTrs
    (13) RewriteLemmaProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 407 ms]
    (14) proven lower bound
    (15) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
    (16) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)


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

(0)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(f(0, x), 1) -> f(g(f(x, x)), x)
   f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(1) NestedDefinedSymbolProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
The TRS does not nest defined symbols.
Hence, the left-hand sides of the following rules are not basic-reachable and can be removed:
f(f(0, x), 1) -> f(g(f(x, x)), x)

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

(2)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(3) RelTrsToTrsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
transformed relative TRS to TRS
----------------------------------------

(4)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(5) CpxTrsMatchBoundsTAProof (FINISHED)
A linear upper bound on the runtime complexity of the TRS R could be shown with a Match-Bound[TAB_LEFTLINEAR,TAB_NONLEFTLINEAR] (for contructor-based start-terms) of 1. 

The compatible tree automaton used to show the Match-Boundedness (for constructor-based start-terms) is represented by: 
final states : [1]
transitions: 
g0(0) -> 0
f0(0, 0) -> 1
f1(0, 0) -> 2
g1(2) -> 1
g1(2) -> 2

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

(6)
BOUNDS(1, n^1)

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

(7) RenamingProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Renamed function symbols to avoid clashes with predefined symbol.
----------------------------------------

(8)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(f(0', x), 1') -> f(g(f(x, x)), x)
   f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(9) TypeInferenceProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Infered types.
----------------------------------------

(10)
Obligation:
TRS:
Rules:
f(f(0', x), 1') -> f(g(f(x, x)), x)
f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

Types:
f :: 0':1':g -> 0':1':g -> 0':1':g
0' :: 0':1':g
1' :: 0':1':g
g :: 0':1':g -> 0':1':g
hole_0':1':g1_0 :: 0':1':g
gen_0':1':g2_0 :: Nat -> 0':1':g

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

(11) OrderProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
Heuristically decided to analyse the following defined symbols:
f
----------------------------------------

(12)
Obligation:
TRS:
Rules:
f(f(0', x), 1') -> f(g(f(x, x)), x)
f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

Types:
f :: 0':1':g -> 0':1':g -> 0':1':g
0' :: 0':1':g
1' :: 0':1':g
g :: 0':1':g -> 0':1':g
hole_0':1':g1_0 :: 0':1':g
gen_0':1':g2_0 :: Nat -> 0':1':g


Generator Equations:
gen_0':1':g2_0(0) <=> 0'
gen_0':1':g2_0(+(x, 1)) <=> g(gen_0':1':g2_0(x))


The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
f
----------------------------------------

(13) RewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
Proved the following rewrite lemma:
f(gen_0':1':g2_0(+(1, n4_0)), gen_0':1':g2_0(b)) -> *3_0, rt in Omega(n4_0)

Induction Base:
f(gen_0':1':g2_0(+(1, 0)), gen_0':1':g2_0(b))

Induction Step:
f(gen_0':1':g2_0(+(1, +(n4_0, 1))), gen_0':1':g2_0(b)) ->_R^Omega(1)
g(f(gen_0':1':g2_0(+(1, n4_0)), gen_0':1':g2_0(b))) ->_IH
g(*3_0)

We have rt in Omega(n^1) and sz in O(n). Thus, we have irc_R in Omega(n).
----------------------------------------

(14)
Obligation:
Proved the lower bound n^1 for the following obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
f(f(0', x), 1') -> f(g(f(x, x)), x)
f(g(x), y) -> g(f(x, y))

Types:
f :: 0':1':g -> 0':1':g -> 0':1':g
0' :: 0':1':g
1' :: 0':1':g
g :: 0':1':g -> 0':1':g
hole_0':1':g1_0 :: 0':1':g
gen_0':1':g2_0 :: Nat -> 0':1':g


Generator Equations:
gen_0':1':g2_0(0) <=> 0'
gen_0':1':g2_0(+(x, 1)) <=> g(gen_0':1':g2_0(x))


The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
f
----------------------------------------

(15) LowerBoundPropagationProof (FINISHED)
Propagated lower bound.
----------------------------------------

(16)
BOUNDS(n^1, INF)