/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty The runtime complexity of the given CpxIntTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(INF, INF).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, 110 ms] (2) BOUNDS(INF, INF) ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Complexity Int TRS consisting of the following rules: f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K) -> Com_1(f2(A, L, M, N, F, F, G, H, I, J, K)) :|: A >= 2 f2(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K) -> Com_1(f1(A, L, M, D, E, F, N, H, I, J, K)) :|: 1 >= A f300(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K) -> Com_1(f2(A, L, M, N, O, O, G, H, P, Q, R)) :|: H >= 1 f300(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K) -> Com_1(f1(A, L, M, D, N, P, O, H, Q, N, R)) :|: 0 >= H The start-symbols are:[f300_11] ---------------------------------------- (1) Loat Proof (FINISHED) ### Pre-processing the ITS problem ### Initial linear ITS problem Start location: f300 0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_2, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=F, [ A>=2 ], cost: 1 1: f2 -> f1 : B'=free_5, C'=free_3, G'=free_4, [ 1>=A ], cost: 1 2: f300 -> f2 : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 ], cost: 1 3: f300 -> f1 : B'=free_19, C'=free_14, E'=free_16, F'=free_18, G'=free_13, Q'=free_15, J'=free_16, K'=free_17, [ 0>=H ], cost: 1 Checking for constant complexity: The following rule is satisfiable with cost >= 1, yielding constant complexity: 2: f300 -> f2 : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 ], cost: 1 Removed unreachable and leaf rules: Start location: f300 0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_2, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=F, [ A>=2 ], cost: 1 2: f300 -> f2 : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 ], cost: 1 ### Simplification by acceleration and chaining ### Accelerating simple loops of location 0. Accelerating the following rules: 0: f2 -> f2 : B'=free_2, C'=free, D'=free_1, E'=F, [ A>=2 ], cost: 1 Accelerated rule 0 with NONTERM, yielding the new rule 4. Removing the simple loops: 0. Accelerated all simple loops using metering functions (where possible): Start location: f300 4: f2 -> [3] : [ A>=2 ], cost: NONTERM 2: f300 -> f2 : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 ], cost: 1 Chained accelerated rules (with incoming rules): Start location: f300 2: f300 -> f2 : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 ], cost: 1 5: f300 -> [3] : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 && A>=2 ], cost: NONTERM Removed unreachable locations (and leaf rules with constant cost): Start location: f300 5: f300 -> [3] : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 && A>=2 ], cost: NONTERM ### Computing asymptotic complexity ### Fully simplified ITS problem Start location: f300 5: f300 -> [3] : B'=free_12, C'=free_7, D'=free_9, E'=free_11, F'=free_11, Q'=free_6, J'=free_8, K'=free_10, [ H>=1 && A>=2 ], cost: NONTERM Computing asymptotic complexity for rule 5 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: [ H>=1 && A>=2 ] NO ---------------------------------------- (2) BOUNDS(INF, INF)