/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_tct_rc /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) * Step 1: Sum WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: c(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> b(a(),b(z,z)) f(b(b(x,f(y)),z)) -> c(z,x,f(b(b(f(a()),y),y))) f(c(c(a(),y,a()),b(x,z),a())) -> b(y,f(c(f(a()),z,z))) - Signature: {c/3,f/1} / {a/0,b/2} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c,f} and constructors {a,b} + Applied Processor: Sum {left = someStrategy, right = someStrategy} + Details: () * Step 2: DependencyPairs WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: c(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> b(a(),b(z,z)) f(b(b(x,f(y)),z)) -> c(z,x,f(b(b(f(a()),y),y))) f(c(c(a(),y,a()),b(x,z),a())) -> b(y,f(c(f(a()),z,z))) - Signature: {c/3,f/1} / {a/0,b/2} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c,f} and constructors {a,b} + Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} + Details: We add the following weak dependency pairs: Strict DPs c#(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> c_1(z,z) f#(b(b(x,f(y)),z)) -> c_2(c#(z,x,f(b(b(f(a()),y),y)))) f#(c(c(a(),y,a()),b(x,z),a())) -> c_3(y,f#(c(f(a()),z,z))) Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. * Step 3: UsableRules WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: c#(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> c_1(z,z) f#(b(b(x,f(y)),z)) -> c_2(c#(z,x,f(b(b(f(a()),y),y)))) f#(c(c(a(),y,a()),b(x,z),a())) -> c_3(y,f#(c(f(a()),z,z))) - Strict TRS: c(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> b(a(),b(z,z)) f(b(b(x,f(y)),z)) -> c(z,x,f(b(b(f(a()),y),y))) f(c(c(a(),y,a()),b(x,z),a())) -> b(y,f(c(f(a()),z,z))) - Signature: {c/3,f/1,c#/3,f#/1} / {a/0,b/2,c_1/2,c_2/1,c_3/2} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,f#} and constructors {a,b} + Applied Processor: UsableRules + Details: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: c#(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> c_1(z,z) * Step 4: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: c#(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> c_1(z,z) - Signature: {c/3,f/1,c#/3,f#/1} / {a/0,b/2,c_1/2,c_2/1,c_3/2} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,f#} and constructors {a,b} + Applied Processor: NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 0, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules} + Details: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation (containing no more than 0 non-zero interpretation-entries in the diagonal of the component-wise maxima): The following argument positions are considered usable: none Following symbols are considered usable: all TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(a) = [0] p(b) = [0] p(c) = [0] p(f) = [0] p(c#) = [8] p(f#) = [0] p(c_1) = [0] p(c_2) = [0] p(c_3) = [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: c#(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) = [8] > [0] = c_1(z,z) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: * Step 5: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak DPs: c#(b(a(),a()),b(y,z),x) -> c_1(z,z) - Signature: {c/3,f/1,c#/3,f#/1} / {a/0,b/2,c_1/2,c_2/1,c_3/2} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,f#} and constructors {a,b} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(?,O(1))