3.11/1.61	WORST_CASE(?, O(1))
3.11/1.61	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat
3.11/1.61	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, 1).
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	(0) CpxIntTrs
3.11/1.61	(1) Koat Proof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
3.11/1.61	(2) BOUNDS(1, 1)
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	----------------------------------------
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	(0)
3.11/1.61	Obligation:
3.11/1.61	Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules:
3.11/1.61	f0(A) -> Com_1(f6(B)) :|: TRUE
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	The start-symbols are:[f0_1]
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	----------------------------------------
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	(1) Koat Proof (FINISHED)
3.11/1.61	YES(?, 1)
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	Initial complexity problem:
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	1:	T:
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61			(Comp: ?, Cost: 1)    f0(ar_0) -> Com_1(f6(b))
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61			(Comp: 1, Cost: 0)    koat_start(ar_0) -> Com_1(f0(ar_0)) [ 0 <= 0 ]
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61		start location:	koat_start
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61		leaf cost:	0
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	Repeatedly propagating knowledge in problem 1 produces the following problem:
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	2:	T:
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61			(Comp: 1, Cost: 1)    f0(ar_0) -> Com_1(f6(b))
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61			(Comp: 1, Cost: 0)    koat_start(ar_0) -> Com_1(f0(ar_0)) [ 0 <= 0 ]
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61		start location:	koat_start
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61		leaf cost:	0
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	Complexity upper bound 1
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	Time: 0.004 sec (SMT: 0.004 sec)
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	----------------------------------------
3.11/1.61	
3.11/1.61	(2)
3.11/1.61	BOUNDS(1, 1)
3.35/2.09	EOF