/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), ?) proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). (0) CpxTRS (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (2) TRS for Loop Detection (3) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (4) BEST (5) proven lower bound (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) (8) TRS for Loop Detection ---------------------------------------- (0) 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: fstsplit(0, x) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> cons(h, fstsplit(n, t)) sndsplit(0, x) -> x sndsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil sndsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> sndsplit(n, t) empty(nil) -> true empty(cons(h, t)) -> false leq(0, m) -> true leq(s(n), 0) -> false leq(s(n), s(m)) -> leq(n, m) length(nil) -> 0 length(cons(h, t)) -> s(length(t)) app(nil, x) -> x app(cons(h, t), x) -> cons(h, app(t, x)) map_f(pid, nil) -> nil map_f(pid, cons(h, t)) -> app(f(pid, h), map_f(pid, t)) process(store, m) -> if1(store, m, leq(m, length(store))) if1(store, m, true) -> if2(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, store))) if1(store, m, false) -> if3(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)))) if2(store, m, false) -> process(app(map_f(self, nil), sndsplit(m, store)), m) if3(store, m, false) -> process(sndsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)), m) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: 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: fstsplit(0, x) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> cons(h, fstsplit(n, t)) sndsplit(0, x) -> x sndsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil sndsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> sndsplit(n, t) empty(nil) -> true empty(cons(h, t)) -> false leq(0, m) -> true leq(s(n), 0) -> false leq(s(n), s(m)) -> leq(n, m) length(nil) -> 0 length(cons(h, t)) -> s(length(t)) app(nil, x) -> x app(cons(h, t), x) -> cons(h, app(t, x)) map_f(pid, nil) -> nil map_f(pid, cons(h, t)) -> app(f(pid, h), map_f(pid, t)) process(store, m) -> if1(store, m, leq(m, length(store))) if1(store, m, true) -> if2(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, store))) if1(store, m, false) -> if3(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)))) if2(store, m, false) -> process(app(map_f(self, nil), sndsplit(m, store)), m) if3(store, m, false) -> process(sndsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)), m) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (3) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1): The rewrite sequence map_f(pid, cons(h, t)) ->^+ app(f(pid, h), map_f(pid, t)) gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [1]. The pumping substitution is [t / cons(h, t)]. The result substitution is [ ]. ---------------------------------------- (4) Complex Obligation (BEST) ---------------------------------------- (5) Obligation: Proved the lower bound n^1 for the following 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: fstsplit(0, x) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> cons(h, fstsplit(n, t)) sndsplit(0, x) -> x sndsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil sndsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> sndsplit(n, t) empty(nil) -> true empty(cons(h, t)) -> false leq(0, m) -> true leq(s(n), 0) -> false leq(s(n), s(m)) -> leq(n, m) length(nil) -> 0 length(cons(h, t)) -> s(length(t)) app(nil, x) -> x app(cons(h, t), x) -> cons(h, app(t, x)) map_f(pid, nil) -> nil map_f(pid, cons(h, t)) -> app(f(pid, h), map_f(pid, t)) process(store, m) -> if1(store, m, leq(m, length(store))) if1(store, m, true) -> if2(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, store))) if1(store, m, false) -> if3(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)))) if2(store, m, false) -> process(app(map_f(self, nil), sndsplit(m, store)), m) if3(store, m, false) -> process(sndsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)), m) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof (FINISHED) Propagated lower bound. ---------------------------------------- (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: 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: fstsplit(0, x) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil fstsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> cons(h, fstsplit(n, t)) sndsplit(0, x) -> x sndsplit(s(n), nil) -> nil sndsplit(s(n), cons(h, t)) -> sndsplit(n, t) empty(nil) -> true empty(cons(h, t)) -> false leq(0, m) -> true leq(s(n), 0) -> false leq(s(n), s(m)) -> leq(n, m) length(nil) -> 0 length(cons(h, t)) -> s(length(t)) app(nil, x) -> x app(cons(h, t), x) -> cons(h, app(t, x)) map_f(pid, nil) -> nil map_f(pid, cons(h, t)) -> app(f(pid, h), map_f(pid, t)) process(store, m) -> if1(store, m, leq(m, length(store))) if1(store, m, true) -> if2(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, store))) if1(store, m, false) -> if3(store, m, empty(fstsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)))) if2(store, m, false) -> process(app(map_f(self, nil), sndsplit(m, store)), m) if3(store, m, false) -> process(sndsplit(m, app(map_f(self, nil), store)), m) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL