/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1), O(n^1)) proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1). (0) CpxTRS (1) DependencyGraphProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (2) CpxTRS (3) RelTrsToTrsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (4) CpxTRS (5) CpxTrsMatchBoundsProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] (6) BOUNDS(1, n^1) (7) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (8) TRS for Loop Detection (9) DecreasingLoopProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (10) BEST (11) proven lower bound (12) LowerBoundPropagationProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] (13) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) (14) TRS for Loop Detection ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1). The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(x), s(0), y) -> f(g(s(0)), y, g(x)) g(s(x)) -> s(g(x)) g(0) -> 0 S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (1) DependencyGraphProof (UPPER BOUND(ID)) The following rules are not reachable from basic terms in the dependency graph and can be removed: f(g(x), s(0), y) -> f(g(s(0)), y, g(x)) ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1). The TRS R consists of the following rules: g(s(x)) -> s(g(x)) g(0) -> 0 S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (3) RelTrsToTrsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID)) transformed relative TRS to TRS ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1). The TRS R consists of the following rules: g(s(x)) -> s(g(x)) g(0) -> 0 S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (5) CpxTrsMatchBoundsProof (FINISHED) A linear upper bound on the runtime complexity of the TRS R could be shown with a Match Bound [MATCHBOUNDS1,MATCHBOUNDS2] of 1. The certificate found is represented by the following graph. "[1, 2, 7] {(1,2,[g_1|0, 0|1]), (1,7,[s_1|1]), (2,2,[s_1|0, 0|0]), (7,2,[g_1|1, 0|1]), (7,7,[s_1|1])}" ---------------------------------------- (6) BOUNDS(1, n^1) ---------------------------------------- (7) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) Transformed a relative TRS into a decreasing-loop problem. ---------------------------------------- (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, n^1). The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(x), s(0), y) -> f(g(s(0)), y, g(x)) g(s(x)) -> s(g(x)) g(0) -> 0 S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (9) DecreasingLoopProof (LOWER BOUND(ID)) The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Omega(n^1): The rewrite sequence g(s(x)) ->^+ s(g(x)) gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0]. The pumping substitution is [x / s(x)]. The result substitution is [ ]. ---------------------------------------- (10) Complex Obligation (BEST) ---------------------------------------- (11) 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, n^1). The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(x), s(0), y) -> f(g(s(0)), y, g(x)) g(s(x)) -> s(g(x)) g(0) -> 0 S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (12) LowerBoundPropagationProof (FINISHED) Propagated lower bound. ---------------------------------------- (13) BOUNDS(n^1, INF) ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Analyzing the following TRS for decreasing loops: The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, n^1). The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(g(x), s(0), y) -> f(g(s(0)), y, g(x)) g(s(x)) -> s(g(x)) g(0) -> 0 S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL