2.80/1.60	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
2.80/1.61	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
2.80/1.61	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	(0) CpxTRS
2.80/1.61	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
2.80/1.61	(2) TRS for Loop Detection
2.80/1.61	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
2.80/1.61	(4) BOUNDS(INF, INF)
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	----------------------------------------
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	(0)
2.80/1.61	Obligation:
2.80/1.61	The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	   f(a) -> f(a)
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	S is empty.
2.80/1.61	Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
2.80/1.61	----------------------------------------
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
2.80/1.61	Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem.
2.80/1.61	----------------------------------------
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	(2)
2.80/1.61	Obligation:
2.80/1.61	Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	   f(a) -> f(a)
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	S is empty.
2.80/1.61	Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
2.80/1.61	----------------------------------------
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof (FINISHED)
2.80/1.61	The following loop proves infinite runtime complexity:
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The rewrite sequence
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	f(a) ->^+ f(a)
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [].
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The pumping substitution is [ ].
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	The result substitution is [ ].
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	----------------------------------------
2.80/1.61	
2.80/1.61	(4)
2.80/1.61	BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.06/1.64	EOF