/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), ?)
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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty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, 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:

   qsort(nil) -> nil
   qsort(cons(x, xs)) -> append(qsort(filterlow(x, cons(x, xs))), cons(x, qsort(filterhigh(x, cons(x, xs)))))
   filterlow(n, nil) -> nil
   filterlow(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if1(ge(n, x), n, x, xs)
   if1(true, n, x, xs) -> filterlow(n, xs)
   if1(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterlow(n, xs))
   filterhigh(n, nil) -> nil
   filterhigh(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if2(ge(x, n), n, x, xs)
   if2(true, n, x, xs) -> filterhigh(n, xs)
   if2(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterhigh(n, xs))
   ge(x, 0) -> true
   ge(0, s(x)) -> false
   ge(s(x), s(y)) -> ge(x, y)
   append(nil, ys) -> ys
   append(cons(x, xs), ys) -> cons(x, append(xs, ys))

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:

   qsort(nil) -> nil
   qsort(cons(x, xs)) -> append(qsort(filterlow(x, cons(x, xs))), cons(x, qsort(filterhigh(x, cons(x, xs)))))
   filterlow(n, nil) -> nil
   filterlow(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if1(ge(n, x), n, x, xs)
   if1(true, n, x, xs) -> filterlow(n, xs)
   if1(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterlow(n, xs))
   filterhigh(n, nil) -> nil
   filterhigh(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if2(ge(x, n), n, x, xs)
   if2(true, n, x, xs) -> filterhigh(n, xs)
   if2(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterhigh(n, xs))
   ge(x, 0) -> true
   ge(0, s(x)) -> false
   ge(s(x), s(y)) -> ge(x, y)
   append(nil, ys) -> ys
   append(cons(x, xs), ys) -> cons(x, append(xs, ys))

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

append(cons(x, xs), ys) ->^+ cons(x, append(xs, ys))

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

The pumping substitution is [xs / cons(x, xs)].

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:

   qsort(nil) -> nil
   qsort(cons(x, xs)) -> append(qsort(filterlow(x, cons(x, xs))), cons(x, qsort(filterhigh(x, cons(x, xs)))))
   filterlow(n, nil) -> nil
   filterlow(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if1(ge(n, x), n, x, xs)
   if1(true, n, x, xs) -> filterlow(n, xs)
   if1(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterlow(n, xs))
   filterhigh(n, nil) -> nil
   filterhigh(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if2(ge(x, n), n, x, xs)
   if2(true, n, x, xs) -> filterhigh(n, xs)
   if2(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterhigh(n, xs))
   ge(x, 0) -> true
   ge(0, s(x)) -> false
   ge(s(x), s(y)) -> ge(x, y)
   append(nil, ys) -> ys
   append(cons(x, xs), ys) -> cons(x, append(xs, ys))

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:

   qsort(nil) -> nil
   qsort(cons(x, xs)) -> append(qsort(filterlow(x, cons(x, xs))), cons(x, qsort(filterhigh(x, cons(x, xs)))))
   filterlow(n, nil) -> nil
   filterlow(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if1(ge(n, x), n, x, xs)
   if1(true, n, x, xs) -> filterlow(n, xs)
   if1(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterlow(n, xs))
   filterhigh(n, nil) -> nil
   filterhigh(n, cons(x, xs)) -> if2(ge(x, n), n, x, xs)
   if2(true, n, x, xs) -> filterhigh(n, xs)
   if2(false, n, x, xs) -> cons(x, filterhigh(n, xs))
   ge(x, 0) -> true
   ge(0, s(x)) -> false
   ge(s(x), s(y)) -> ge(x, y)
   append(nil, ys) -> ys
   append(cons(x, xs), ys) -> cons(x, append(xs, ys))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL