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


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


WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?)
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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty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(INF, 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
        (9) InfiniteLowerBoundProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
        (10) BOUNDS(INF, INF)


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

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


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
   sqr(0) -> 0
   sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
   dbl(0) -> 0
   dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
   add(0, X) -> X
   add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
   first(0, X) -> nil
   first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
   half(0) -> 0
   half(s(0)) -> 0
   half(s(s(X))) -> s(half(X))
   half(dbl(X)) -> 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(INF, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
   sqr(0) -> 0
   sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
   dbl(0) -> 0
   dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
   add(0, X) -> X
   add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
   first(0, X) -> nil
   first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
   half(0) -> 0
   half(s(0)) -> 0
   half(s(s(X))) -> s(half(X))
   half(dbl(X)) -> 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

first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) ->^+ cons(Y, first(X, Z))

gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [1].

The pumping substitution is [X / s(X), Z / cons(Y, Z)].

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(INF, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
   sqr(0) -> 0
   sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
   dbl(0) -> 0
   dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
   add(0, X) -> X
   add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
   first(0, X) -> nil
   first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
   half(0) -> 0
   half(s(0)) -> 0
   half(s(s(X))) -> s(half(X))
   half(dbl(X)) -> 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(INF, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
   sqr(0) -> 0
   sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
   dbl(0) -> 0
   dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
   add(0, X) -> X
   add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
   first(0, X) -> nil
   first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
   half(0) -> 0
   half(s(0)) -> 0
   half(s(s(X))) -> s(half(X))
   half(dbl(X)) -> X

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

(9) InfiniteLowerBoundProof (FINISHED)
The following loop proves infinite runtime complexity:

The rewrite sequence

terms(N) ->^+ cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))

gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [1].

The pumping substitution is [ ].

The result substitution is [N / s(N)].




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

(10)
BOUNDS(INF, INF)