/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty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, 11 ms]
(2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)


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

(0)
Obligation:
Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules:
f10(A, B, C, D, E, F) -> Com_1(f4(4, 0, 0, D, E, F)) :|: TRUE
f4(A, B, C, D, E, F) -> Com_1(f9(A, B, C, C, C, F)) :|: TRUE
f7(A, B, C, D, E, F) -> Com_1(f4(A, 1 + B, G, H, E, G)) :|: TRUE
f4(A, B, C, D, E, F) -> Com_1(f4(A, 1 + B, G, H, E, G)) :|: TRUE
f6(A, B, C, D, E, F) -> Com_1(f4(A, 1 + B, G, H, E, G)) :|: TRUE

The start-symbols are:[f10_6]


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

(1) Loat Proof (FINISHED)


### Pre-processing the ITS problem ###



Initial linear ITS problem

   Start location: f10

      0: f10 -> f4 : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: 1

      1: f4 -> f9 : D'=C, E'=C, [], cost: 1

      3: f4 -> f4 : B'=1+B, C'=free_2, D'=free_3, F'=free_2, [], cost: 1

      2: f7 -> f4 : B'=1+B, C'=free, D'=free_1, F'=free, [], cost: 1

      4: f6 -> f4 : B'=1+B, C'=free_4, D'=free_5, F'=free_4, [], cost: 1



Checking for constant complexity:

   The following rule is satisfiable with cost >= 1, yielding constant complexity:

      0: f10 -> f4 : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: 1



Removed unreachable and leaf rules:

   Start location: f10

      0: f10 -> f4 : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: 1

      3: f4 -> f4 : B'=1+B, C'=free_2, D'=free_3, F'=free_2, [], cost: 1



### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ###



Accelerating simple loops of location 1.

   Accelerating the following rules:

      3: f4 -> f4 : B'=1+B, C'=free_2, D'=free_3, F'=free_2, [], cost: 1



   Accelerated rule 3 with NONTERM, yielding the new rule 5.

   Removing the simple loops: 3.



Accelerated all simple loops using metering functions (where possible):

   Start location: f10

      0: f10 -> f4 : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: 1

      5: f4 -> [5] : [], cost: NONTERM



Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules):

   Start location: f10

      0: f10 -> f4 : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: 1

      6: f10 -> [5] : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: NONTERM



Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost):

   Start location: f10

      6: f10 -> [5] : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: NONTERM



### Computing asymptotic complexity ###



Fully simplified ITS problem

   Start location: f10

      6: f10 -> [5] : A'=4, B'=0, C'=0, [], cost: NONTERM



Computing asymptotic complexity for rule 6

   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)