3.23/1.56	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
3.23/1.56	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.23/1.56	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	(0) CpxTRS
3.23/1.56	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
3.23/1.56	(2) TRS for Loop Detection
3.23/1.56	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
3.23/1.56	(4) BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	----------------------------------------
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	(0)
3.23/1.56	Obligation:
3.23/1.56	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	   f(x) -> g(f(x))
3.23/1.56	   g(f(x)) -> x
3.23/1.56	   g(x) -> a
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	S is empty.
3.23/1.56	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.23/1.56	----------------------------------------
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
3.23/1.56	Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem.
3.23/1.56	----------------------------------------
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	(2)
3.23/1.56	Obligation:
3.23/1.56	Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	   f(x) -> g(f(x))
3.23/1.56	   g(f(x)) -> x
3.23/1.56	   g(x) -> a
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	S is empty.
3.23/1.56	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.23/1.56	----------------------------------------
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof (FINISHED)
3.23/1.56	The following loop proves infinite runtime complexity:
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The rewrite sequence
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	f(x) ->^+ g(f(x))
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The pumping substitution is [ ].
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	The result substitution is [ ].
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	----------------------------------------
3.23/1.56	
3.23/1.56	(4)
3.23/1.56	BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.34/2.42	EOF