/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), ?)
proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty


The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).

(0) CpxTRS
(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(2) TRS for Loop Detection
(3) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(4) BEST
    (5) proven lower bound
        (6) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
        (7) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)
    (8) TRS for Loop Detection


----------------------------------------

(0)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   active(filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M)) -> mark(cons(0, filter(Y, M, M)))
   active(filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M)) -> mark(cons(X, filter(Y, N, M)))
   active(sieve(cons(0, Y))) -> mark(cons(0, sieve(Y)))
   active(sieve(cons(s(N), Y))) -> mark(cons(s(N), sieve(filter(Y, N, N))))
   active(nats(N)) -> mark(cons(N, nats(s(N))))
   active(zprimes) -> mark(sieve(nats(s(s(0)))))
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(active(X1), X2, X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, active(X2), X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, X2, active(X3))
   active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
   active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
   active(sieve(X)) -> sieve(active(X))
   active(nats(X)) -> nats(active(X))
   filter(mark(X1), X2, X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, X2, mark(X3)) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
   s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
   sieve(mark(X)) -> mark(sieve(X))
   nats(mark(X)) -> mark(nats(X))
   proper(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
   proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
   proper(0) -> ok(0)
   proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
   proper(sieve(X)) -> sieve(proper(X))
   proper(nats(X)) -> nats(proper(X))
   proper(zprimes) -> ok(zprimes)
   filter(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
   s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
   sieve(ok(X)) -> ok(sieve(X))
   nats(ok(X)) -> ok(nats(X))
   top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
   top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem.
----------------------------------------

(2)
Obligation:
Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:

The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   active(filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M)) -> mark(cons(0, filter(Y, M, M)))
   active(filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M)) -> mark(cons(X, filter(Y, N, M)))
   active(sieve(cons(0, Y))) -> mark(cons(0, sieve(Y)))
   active(sieve(cons(s(N), Y))) -> mark(cons(s(N), sieve(filter(Y, N, N))))
   active(nats(N)) -> mark(cons(N, nats(s(N))))
   active(zprimes) -> mark(sieve(nats(s(s(0)))))
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(active(X1), X2, X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, active(X2), X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, X2, active(X3))
   active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
   active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
   active(sieve(X)) -> sieve(active(X))
   active(nats(X)) -> nats(active(X))
   filter(mark(X1), X2, X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, X2, mark(X3)) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
   s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
   sieve(mark(X)) -> mark(sieve(X))
   nats(mark(X)) -> mark(nats(X))
   proper(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
   proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
   proper(0) -> ok(0)
   proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
   proper(sieve(X)) -> sieve(proper(X))
   proper(nats(X)) -> nats(proper(X))
   proper(zprimes) -> ok(zprimes)
   filter(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
   s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
   sieve(ok(X)) -> ok(sieve(X))
   nats(ok(X)) -> ok(nats(X))
   top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
   top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(3) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID))
The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1):

The rewrite sequence

filter(X1, mark(X2), X3) ->^+ mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))

gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].

The pumping substitution is [X2 / mark(X2)].

The result substitution is [ ].




----------------------------------------

(4)
Complex Obligation (BEST)

----------------------------------------

(5)
Obligation:
Proved the lower bound n^1 for the following obligation:

The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   active(filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M)) -> mark(cons(0, filter(Y, M, M)))
   active(filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M)) -> mark(cons(X, filter(Y, N, M)))
   active(sieve(cons(0, Y))) -> mark(cons(0, sieve(Y)))
   active(sieve(cons(s(N), Y))) -> mark(cons(s(N), sieve(filter(Y, N, N))))
   active(nats(N)) -> mark(cons(N, nats(s(N))))
   active(zprimes) -> mark(sieve(nats(s(s(0)))))
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(active(X1), X2, X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, active(X2), X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, X2, active(X3))
   active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
   active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
   active(sieve(X)) -> sieve(active(X))
   active(nats(X)) -> nats(active(X))
   filter(mark(X1), X2, X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, X2, mark(X3)) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
   s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
   sieve(mark(X)) -> mark(sieve(X))
   nats(mark(X)) -> mark(nats(X))
   proper(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
   proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
   proper(0) -> ok(0)
   proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
   proper(sieve(X)) -> sieve(proper(X))
   proper(nats(X)) -> nats(proper(X))
   proper(zprimes) -> ok(zprimes)
   filter(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
   s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
   sieve(ok(X)) -> ok(sieve(X))
   nats(ok(X)) -> ok(nats(X))
   top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
   top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
----------------------------------------

(6) LowerBoundPropagationProof (FINISHED)
Propagated lower bound.
----------------------------------------

(7)
BOUNDS(n^1, INF)

----------------------------------------

(8)
Obligation:
Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops:

The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   active(filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M)) -> mark(cons(0, filter(Y, M, M)))
   active(filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M)) -> mark(cons(X, filter(Y, N, M)))
   active(sieve(cons(0, Y))) -> mark(cons(0, sieve(Y)))
   active(sieve(cons(s(N), Y))) -> mark(cons(s(N), sieve(filter(Y, N, N))))
   active(nats(N)) -> mark(cons(N, nats(s(N))))
   active(zprimes) -> mark(sieve(nats(s(s(0)))))
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(active(X1), X2, X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, active(X2), X3)
   active(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(X1, X2, active(X3))
   active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
   active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
   active(sieve(X)) -> sieve(active(X))
   active(nats(X)) -> nats(active(X))
   filter(mark(X1), X2, X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   filter(X1, X2, mark(X3)) -> mark(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
   s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
   sieve(mark(X)) -> mark(sieve(X))
   nats(mark(X)) -> mark(nats(X))
   proper(filter(X1, X2, X3)) -> filter(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
   proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
   proper(0) -> ok(0)
   proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
   proper(sieve(X)) -> sieve(proper(X))
   proper(nats(X)) -> nats(proper(X))
   proper(zprimes) -> ok(zprimes)
   filter(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(filter(X1, X2, X3))
   cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
   s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
   sieve(ok(X)) -> ok(sieve(X))
   nats(ok(X)) -> ok(nats(X))
   top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
   top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL