2.95/1.65	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
3.31/1.67	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.31/1.67	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF).
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(0) CpxTRS
3.31/1.67	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
3.31/1.67	(2) TRS for Loop Detection
3.31/1.67	(3) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
3.31/1.67	(4) BEST
3.31/1.67	    (5) proven lower bound
3.31/1.67	        (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
3.31/1.67	        (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)
3.31/1.67	    (8) TRS for Loop Detection
3.31/1.67	        (9) DecreasingLoopProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
3.31/1.67	        (10) BOUNDS(EXP, INF)
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(0)
3.31/1.67	Obligation:
3.31/1.67	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF).
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
3.31/1.67	   sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
3.31/1.67	   sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> n__from(X)
3.31/1.67	   s(X) -> n__s(X)
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__from(X)) -> from(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(X) -> X
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	S is empty.
3.31/1.67	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
3.31/1.67	Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem.
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(2)
3.31/1.67	Obligation:
3.31/1.67	Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF).
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
3.31/1.67	   sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
3.31/1.67	   sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> n__from(X)
3.31/1.67	   s(X) -> n__s(X)
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__from(X)) -> from(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(X) -> X
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	S is empty.
3.31/1.67	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(3) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
3.31/1.67	The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1):
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The rewrite sequence
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	activate(n__s(X)) ->^+ s(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The pumping substitution is [X / n__s(X)].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The result substitution is [ ].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(4)
3.31/1.67	Complex Obligation (BEST)
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(5)
3.31/1.67	Obligation:
3.31/1.67	Proved the lower bound n^1 for the following obligation:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF).
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
3.31/1.67	   sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
3.31/1.67	   sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> n__from(X)
3.31/1.67	   s(X) -> n__s(X)
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__from(X)) -> from(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(X) -> X
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	S is empty.
3.31/1.67	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(6) LowerBoundPropagationProof (FINISHED)
3.31/1.67	Propagated lower bound.
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(7)
3.31/1.67	BOUNDS(n^1, INF)
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(8)
3.31/1.67	Obligation:
3.31/1.67	Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF).
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
3.31/1.67	   sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
3.31/1.67	   sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
3.31/1.67	   from(X) -> n__from(X)
3.31/1.67	   s(X) -> n__s(X)
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__from(X)) -> from(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
3.31/1.67	   activate(X) -> X
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	S is empty.
3.31/1.67	Rewrite Strategy: FULL
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(9) DecreasingLoopProof (FINISHED)
3.31/1.67	The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound EXP:
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The rewrite sequence
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	activate(n__from(X)) ->^+ cons(activate(X), n__from(n__s(activate(X))))
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The pumping substitution is [X / n__from(X)].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The result substitution is [ ].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The rewrite sequence
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	activate(n__from(X)) ->^+ cons(activate(X), n__from(n__s(activate(X))))
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [1,0,0].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The pumping substitution is [X / n__from(X)].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	The result substitution is [ ].
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	----------------------------------------
3.31/1.67	
3.31/1.67	(10)
3.31/1.67	BOUNDS(EXP, INF)
3.36/1.70	EOF