MAYBE
We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
certificate MAYBE.
Strict Trs:
{ minus(x, y) -> cond(min(x, y), x, y)
, cond(y, x, y) -> s(minus(x, s(y)))
, min(u, 0()) -> 0()
, min(s(u), s(v)) -> s(min(u, v))
, min(0(), v) -> 0() }
Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity
Answer:
MAYBE
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'WithProblem (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the
following reason:
Computation stopped due to timeout after 60.0 seconds.
2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'WithProblem (timeout of 30 seconds) (timeout of 60 seconds)'
failed due to the following reason:
The weightgap principle applies (using the following nonconstant
growth matrix-interpretation)
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(cond) = {1}, Uargs(s) = {1}
TcT has computed the following matrix interpretation satisfying
not(EDA) and not(IDA(1)).
[minus](x1, x2) = [1] x1 + [4]
[cond](x1, x2, x3) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [0]
[min](x1, x2) = [0]
[s](x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
[0] = [7]
The following symbols are considered usable
{minus, cond, min}
The order satisfies the following ordering constraints:
[minus(x, y)] = [1] x + [4]
> [1] x + [0]
= [cond(min(x, y), x, y)]
[cond(y, x, y)] = [1] x + [1] y + [0]
? [1] x + [4]
= [s(minus(x, s(y)))]
[min(u, 0())] = [0]
? [7]
= [0()]
[min(s(u), s(v))] = [0]
>= [0]
= [s(min(u, v))]
[min(0(), v)] = [0]
? [7]
= [0()]
Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
certificate MAYBE.
Strict Trs:
{ cond(y, x, y) -> s(minus(x, s(y)))
, min(u, 0()) -> 0()
, min(s(u), s(v)) -> s(min(u, v))
, min(0(), v) -> 0() }
Weak Trs: { minus(x, y) -> cond(min(x, y), x, y) }
Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity
Answer:
MAYBE
The weightgap principle applies (using the following nonconstant
growth matrix-interpretation)
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(cond) = {1}, Uargs(s) = {1}
TcT has computed the following matrix interpretation satisfying
not(EDA) and not(IDA(1)).
[minus](x1, x2) = [1] x1 + [4]
[cond](x1, x2, x3) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [0]
[min](x1, x2) = [1]
[s](x1) = [1] x1 + [4]
[0] = [0]
The following symbols are considered usable
{minus, cond, min}
The order satisfies the following ordering constraints:
[minus(x, y)] = [1] x + [4]
> [1] x + [1]
= [cond(min(x, y), x, y)]
[cond(y, x, y)] = [1] x + [1] y + [0]
? [1] x + [8]
= [s(minus(x, s(y)))]
[min(u, 0())] = [1]
> [0]
= [0()]
[min(s(u), s(v))] = [1]
? [5]
= [s(min(u, v))]
[min(0(), v)] = [1]
> [0]
= [0()]
Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
certificate MAYBE.
Strict Trs:
{ cond(y, x, y) -> s(minus(x, s(y)))
, min(s(u), s(v)) -> s(min(u, v)) }
Weak Trs:
{ minus(x, y) -> cond(min(x, y), x, y)
, min(u, 0()) -> 0()
, min(0(), v) -> 0() }
Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity
Answer:
MAYBE
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'Fastest' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'empty' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'WithProblem' failed due to the following reason:
Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'bsearch-popstar (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the
following reason:
The input cannot be shown compatible
2) 'Polynomial Path Order (PS) (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due
to the following reason:
The input cannot be shown compatible
3) 'Fastest (timeout of 5 seconds) (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed
due to the following reason:
None of the processors succeeded.
Details of failed attempt(s):
-----------------------------
1) 'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
failed due to the following reason:
match-boundness of the problem could not be verified.
2) 'Bounds with perSymbol-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
failed due to the following reason:
match-boundness of the problem could not be verified.
Arrrr..