3.01/1.56	WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
3.18/1.57	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.18/1.57	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	(0) CpxTRS
3.18/1.57	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
3.18/1.57	(2) TRS for Loop Detection
3.18/1.57	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
3.18/1.57	(4) BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	----------------------------------------
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	(0)
3.18/1.57	Obligation:
3.18/1.57	The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	   f(X) -> f(X)
3.18/1.57	   c -> a
3.18/1.57	   c -> b
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	S is empty.
3.18/1.57	Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
3.18/1.57	----------------------------------------
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
3.18/1.57	Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem.
3.18/1.57	----------------------------------------
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	(2)
3.18/1.57	Obligation:
3.18/1.57	Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	   f(X) -> f(X)
3.18/1.57	   c -> a
3.18/1.57	   c -> b
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	S is empty.
3.18/1.57	Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
3.18/1.57	----------------------------------------
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	(3) InfiniteLowerBoundProof (FINISHED)
3.18/1.57	The following loop proves infinite runtime complexity:
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The rewrite sequence
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	f(X) ->^+ f(X)
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [].
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The pumping substitution is [ ].
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	The result substitution is [ ].
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	----------------------------------------
3.18/1.57	
3.18/1.57	(4)
3.18/1.57	BOUNDS(INF, INF)
3.18/1.59	EOF