364.56/291.48 WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), ?) 364.56/291.49 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml 364.56/291.49 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (0) CpxTRS 364.56/291.49 (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] 364.56/291.49 (2) TRS for Loop Detection 364.56/291.49 (3) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] 364.56/291.49 (4) BEST 364.56/291.49 (5) proven lower bound 364.56/291.49 (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] 364.56/291.49 (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) 364.56/291.49 (8) TRS for Loop Detection 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (0) 364.56/291.49 Obligation: 364.56/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 f(s(x), y) -> f(x, s(s(x))) 364.56/291.49 f(x, s(s(y))) -> f(y, x) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 S is empty. 364.56/291.49 Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) 364.56/291.49 Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem. 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (2) 364.56/291.49 Obligation: 364.56/291.49 Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 f(s(x), y) -> f(x, s(s(x))) 364.56/291.49 f(x, s(s(y))) -> f(y, x) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 S is empty. 364.56/291.49 Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (3) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) 364.56/291.49 The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1): 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The rewrite sequence 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 f(s(x), y) ->^+ f(x, s(s(x))) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position []. 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The pumping substitution is [x / s(x)]. 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The result substitution is [y / s(s(x))]. 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (4) 364.56/291.49 Complex Obligation (BEST) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (5) 364.56/291.49 Obligation: 364.56/291.49 Proved the lower bound n^1 for the following obligation: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 f(s(x), y) -> f(x, s(s(x))) 364.56/291.49 f(x, s(s(y))) -> f(y, x) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 S is empty. 364.56/291.49 Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof (FINISHED) 364.56/291.49 Propagated lower bound. 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (7) 364.56/291.49 BOUNDS(n^1, INF) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 ---------------------------------------- 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 (8) 364.56/291.49 Obligation: 364.56/291.49 Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF). 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 f(s(x), y) -> f(x, s(s(x))) 364.56/291.49 f(x, s(s(y))) -> f(y, x) 364.56/291.49 364.56/291.49 S is empty. 364.56/291.49 Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST 364.56/291.53 EOF