3.12/1.56 WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?) 3.12/1.57 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml 3.12/1.57 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF). 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 (0) CpxTRS 3.12/1.57 (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] 3.12/1.57 (2) TRS for Loop Detection 3.12/1.57 (3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] 3.12/1.57 (4) BOUNDS(INF, INF) 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 ---------------------------------------- 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 (0) 3.12/1.57 Obligation: 3.12/1.57 The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF). 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X))) 3.12/1.57 sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X 3.12/1.57 sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, Z) 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 S is empty. 3.12/1.57 Rewrite Strategy: FULL 3.12/1.57 ---------------------------------------- 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) 3.12/1.57 Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem. 3.12/1.57 ---------------------------------------- 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 (2) 3.12/1.57 Obligation: 3.12/1.57 Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF). 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X))) 3.12/1.57 sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X 3.12/1.57 sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, Z) 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 S is empty. 3.12/1.57 Rewrite Strategy: FULL 3.12/1.57 ---------------------------------------- 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 (3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof (FINISHED) 3.12/1.57 The following loop proves infinite runtime complexity: 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The rewrite sequence 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 from(X) ->^+ cons(X, from(s(X))) 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [1]. 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The pumping substitution is [ ]. 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 The result substitution is [X / s(X)]. 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 ---------------------------------------- 3.12/1.57 3.12/1.57 (4) 3.12/1.57 BOUNDS(INF, INF) 3.12/1.60 EOF