3.54/1.78	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
3.54/1.79	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat
3.54/1.79	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	(0) CpxIntTrs
3.54/1.79	(1) Loat Proof [FINISHED, 169 ms]
3.54/1.79	(2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	----------------------------------------
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	(0)
3.54/1.79	Obligation:
3.54/1.79	Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules:
3.54/1.79	f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H) -> Com_1(f1(A, B, I, J, K, F, G, H)) :|: B >= 1 + A
3.54/1.79	f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H) -> Com_1(f300(A, B, I, J, E, K, G, H)) :|: A >= B
3.54/1.79	f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H) -> Com_1(f1(A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J)) :|: TRUE
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	The start-symbols are:[f2_8]
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	----------------------------------------
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	(1) Loat Proof (FINISHED)
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	### Pre-processing the ITS problem ###
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Initial linear ITS problem
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Start location: f2
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      0: f1 -> f1 : C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, [ A>=1+B ], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      1: f1 -> f300 : C'=free_3, D'=free_4, F'=free_5, [ B>=A ], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Removed unreachable and leaf rules:
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Start location: f2
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      0: f1 -> f1 : C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, [ A>=1+B ], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ###
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Accelerating simple loops of location 0.
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Accelerating the following rules:
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      0: f1 -> f1 : C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=free_2, [ A>=1+B ], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Accelerated rule 0 with NONTERM, yielding the new rule 3.
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Removing the simple loops: 0.
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Accelerated all simple loops using metering functions (where possible):
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Start location: f2
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      3: f1 -> [3] : [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules):
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Start location: f2
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      2: f2 -> f1 : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [], cost: 1
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      4: f2 -> [3] : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost):
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Start location: f2
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      4: f2 -> [3] : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	### Computing asymptotic complexity ###
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Fully simplified ITS problem
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Start location: f2
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	      4: f2 -> [3] : G'=free_6, H'=free_7, [ A>=1+B ], cost: INF
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Computing asymptotic complexity for rule 4
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Resulting cost INF has complexity: Nonterm
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Found new complexity Nonterm.
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	Obtained the following overall complexity (w.r.t. the length of the input n):
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Complexity:  Nonterm
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Cpx degree:  Nonterm
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Solved cost: INF
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Rule cost:   INF
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	   Rule guard:  [ A>=1+B ]
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	NO
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	----------------------------------------
3.54/1.79	
3.54/1.79	(2)
3.54/1.79	BOUNDS(INF, INF)
4.10/1.81	EOF