3.49/1.79	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
3.49/1.80	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat
3.49/1.80	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	(0) CpxIntTrs
3.49/1.80	(1) Loat Proof [FINISHED, 123 ms]
3.49/1.80	(2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	----------------------------------------
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	(0)
3.49/1.80	Obligation:
3.49/1.80	Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules:
3.49/1.80	f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f2(A, K, L, M, N, O, G, H, I, J)) :|: A >= 1
3.49/1.80	f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f300(A, K, L, D, E, F, M, H, I, J)) :|: 0 >= A
3.49/1.80	f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J) -> Com_1(f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, K, L, K)) :|: TRUE
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	The start-symbols are:[f1_10]
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	----------------------------------------
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	(1) Loat Proof (FINISHED)
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	### Pre-processing the ITS problem ###
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Initial linear ITS problem
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Start location: f1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_3, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, F'=free_4, [ A>=1 ], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      1: f2 -> f300 : B'=free_7, C'=free_5, G'=free_6, [ 0>=A ], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Removed unreachable and leaf rules:
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Start location: f1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_3, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, F'=free_4, [ A>=1 ], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ###
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Accelerating simple loops of location 0.
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Accelerating the following rules:
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_3, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, F'=free_4, [ A>=1 ], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Accelerated rule 0 with NONTERM, yielding the new rule 3.
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Removing the simple loops: 0.
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Accelerated all simple loops using metering functions (where possible):
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Start location: f1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      3: f2 -> [3] : [ A>=1 ], cost: INF
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules):
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Start location: f1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      2: f1 -> f2 : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [], cost: 1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      4: f1 -> [3] : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [ A>=1 ], cost: INF
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost):
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Start location: f1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      4: f1 -> [3] : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [ A>=1 ], cost: INF
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	### Computing asymptotic complexity ###
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Fully simplified ITS problem
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Start location: f1
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	      4: f1 -> [3] : H'=free_9, Q'=free_8, J'=free_9, [ A>=1 ], cost: INF
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Computing asymptotic complexity for rule 4
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Resulting cost INF has complexity: Nonterm
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Found new complexity Nonterm.
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	Obtained the following overall complexity (w.r.t. the length of the input n):
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Complexity:  Nonterm
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Cpx degree:  Nonterm
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Solved cost: INF
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Rule cost:   INF
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	   Rule guard:  [ A>=1 ]
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	NO
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	----------------------------------------
3.49/1.80	
3.49/1.80	(2)
3.49/1.80	BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.79/1.83	EOF