/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF). (0) CpxTRS (1) RelTrsToDecreasingLoopProblemProof [LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms] (2) TRS for Loop Detection (3) DecreasingLoopProof [FINISHED, 0 ms] (4) BOUNDS(EXP, INF) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(EXP, INF). The TRS R consists of the following rules: qsort(nil) -> nil qsort(.(x, y)) -> ++(qsort(lowers(x, y)), .(x, qsort(greaters(x, y)))) lowers(x, nil) -> nil lowers(x, .(y, z)) -> if(<=(y, x), .(y, lowers(x, z)), lowers(x, z)) greaters(x, nil) -> nil greaters(x, .(y, z)) -> if(<=(y, x), greaters(x, z), .(y, greaters(x, z))) 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(EXP, INF). The TRS R consists of the following rules: qsort(nil) -> nil qsort(.(x, y)) -> ++(qsort(lowers(x, y)), .(x, qsort(greaters(x, y)))) lowers(x, nil) -> nil lowers(x, .(y, z)) -> if(<=(y, x), .(y, lowers(x, z)), lowers(x, z)) greaters(x, nil) -> nil greaters(x, .(y, z)) -> if(<=(y, x), greaters(x, z), .(y, greaters(x, z))) S is empty. Rewrite Strategy: FULL ---------------------------------------- (3) DecreasingLoopProof (FINISHED) The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound EXP: The rewrite sequence greaters(x, .(y, z)) ->^+ if(<=(y, x), greaters(x, z), .(y, greaters(x, z))) gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [1]. The pumping substitution is [z / .(y, z)]. The result substitution is [ ]. The rewrite sequence greaters(x, .(y, z)) ->^+ if(<=(y, x), greaters(x, z), .(y, greaters(x, z))) gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [2,1]. The pumping substitution is [z / .(y, z)]. The result substitution is [ ]. ---------------------------------------- (4) BOUNDS(EXP, INF)