/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_complexity /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(NON_POLY, ?) proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.koat # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF). (0) CpxIntTrs (1) Loat Proof [FINISHED, 639 ms] (2) BOUNDS(INF, INF) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: f0(A, B) -> Com_1(f3(0, B)) :|: TRUE f3(A, B) -> Com_1(f3(C + 1, B)) :|: A >= 5 && A <= 5 f3(A, B) -> Com_1(f3(A + 1, A)) :|: 9 >= A && 4 >= A f3(A, B) -> Com_1(f3(A + 1, A)) :|: 9 >= A && A >= 6 f3(A, B) -> Com_1(f12(A, B)) :|: A >= 10 The start-symbols are:[f0_2] ---------------------------------------- (1) Loat Proof (FINISHED) ### Pre-processing the ITS problem ### Initial linear ITS problem Start location: f0 0: f0 -> f3 : A'=0, [], cost: 1 1: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+free, [ A==5 ], cost: 1 2: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 9>=A && 4>=A ], cost: 1 3: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 9>=A && A>=6 ], cost: 1 4: f3 -> f12 : [ A>=10 ], cost: 1 Checking for constant complexity: The following rule is satisfiable with cost >= 1, yielding constant complexity: 0: f0 -> f3 : A'=0, [], cost: 1 Removed unreachable and leaf rules: Start location: f0 0: f0 -> f3 : A'=0, [], cost: 1 1: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+free, [ A==5 ], cost: 1 2: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 9>=A && 4>=A ], cost: 1 3: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 9>=A && A>=6 ], cost: 1 Simplified all rules, resulting in: Start location: f0 0: f0 -> f3 : A'=0, [], cost: 1 1: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+free, [ A==5 ], cost: 1 2: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 4>=A ], cost: 1 3: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 9>=A && A>=6 ], cost: 1 ### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ### Accelerating simple loops of location 1. Accelerating the following rules: 1: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+free, [ A==5 ], cost: 1 2: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 4>=A ], cost: 1 3: f3 -> f3 : A'=1+A, B'=A, [ 9>=A && A>=6 ], cost: 1 Accelerated rule 1 with NONTERM (after strengthening guard), yielding the new rule 5. Accelerated rule 2 with metering function 5-A, yielding the new rule 6. Accelerated rule 3 with metering function 10-A, yielding the new rule 7. Nested simple loops 1 (outer loop) and 6 (inner loop) with NONTERM, resulting in the new rules: 8, 9. Nested simple loops 1 (outer loop) and 7 (inner loop) with metering function meter (where 5*meter==5-A), resulting in the new rules: 10. Removing the simple loops: 1 2 3. Accelerated all simple loops using metering functions (where possible): Start location: f0 0: f0 -> f3 : A'=0, [], cost: 1 5: f3 -> [3] : [ A==5 && 1+free==5 ], cost: NONTERM 6: f3 -> f3 : A'=5, B'=4, [ 4>=A ], cost: 5-A 7: f3 -> f3 : A'=10, B'=9, [ 9>=A && A>=6 ], cost: 10-A 8: f3 -> [3] : [ A==5 && 4>=1+free ], cost: NONTERM 9: f3 -> [3] : A'=5, B'=4, [ 4>=A && 4>=1+free ], cost: NONTERM 10: f3 -> f3 : A'=10, B'=9, [ A==5 && 9>=1+free && 1+free>=6 && 5*meter==5-A && meter>=1 ], cost: 10*meter-meter*free Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules): Start location: f0 0: f0 -> f3 : A'=0, [], cost: 1 11: f0 -> f3 : A'=5, B'=4, [], cost: 6 12: f0 -> [3] : A'=5, B'=4, [], cost: NONTERM Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost): Start location: f0 12: f0 -> [3] : A'=5, B'=4, [], cost: NONTERM ### Computing asymptotic complexity ### Fully simplified ITS problem Start location: f0 12: f0 -> [3] : A'=5, B'=4, [], cost: NONTERM Computing asymptotic complexity for rule 12 Guard is satisfiable, yielding nontermination Resulting cost NONTERM has complexity: Nonterm Found new complexity Nonterm. Obtained the following overall complexity (w.r.t. the length of the input n): Complexity: Nonterm Cpx degree: Nonterm Solved cost: NONTERM Rule cost: NONTERM Rule guard: [] NO ---------------------------------------- (2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)