3.15/1.60	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
3.15/1.60	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.15/1.60	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	(0) CpxTRS
3.15/1.60	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
3.15/1.60	(2) TRS for Loop Detection
3.15/1.60	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
3.15/1.60	(4) BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	(0)
3.15/1.60	Obligation:
3.15/1.60	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	   *(X, +(Y, 1)) -> +(*(X, +(Y, *(1, 0))), X)
3.15/1.60	   *(X, 1) -> X
3.15/1.60	   *(X, 0) -> X
3.15/1.60	   *(X, 0) -> 0
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	S is empty.
3.15/1.60	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.15/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
3.15/1.60	Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem.
3.15/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	(2)
3.15/1.60	Obligation:
3.15/1.60	Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	   *(X, +(Y, 1)) -> +(*(X, +(Y, *(1, 0))), X)
3.15/1.60	   *(X, 1) -> X
3.15/1.60	   *(X, 0) -> X
3.15/1.60	   *(X, 0) -> 0
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	S is empty.
3.15/1.60	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.15/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof (FINISHED)
3.15/1.60	The following loop proves infinite runtime complexity:
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The rewrite sequence
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	*(X, +(Y, 1)) ->^+ +(*(X, +(Y, 1)), X)
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The pumping substitution is [ ].
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	The result substitution is [ ].
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.15/1.60	
3.15/1.60	(4)
3.15/1.60	BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.15/1.63	EOF