Problem Secret 06 SRS secr3

Tool CaT

Execution Time	Unknown
Answer	YES(?,O(n^1))
Input	Secret 06 SRS secr3

stdout:

YES(?,O(n^1))

Problem:
a(b(a(x1))) -> b(c(x1))
b(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(x1))
c(x1) -> a(b(x1))
c(d(x1)) -> d(c(b(a(x1))))

Proof:
Bounds Processor:
  bound: 2
  enrichment: match
  automaton:
   final states: {4,3,2}
   transitions:
    d1(19) -> 20*
    c1(18) -> 19*
    b1(5) -> 6*
    b1(17) -> 18*
    a1(16) -> 17*
    a1(6) -> 7*
    a2(22) -> 23*
    a0(1) -> 2*
    b2(21) -> 22*
    b0(1) -> 3*
    c0(1) -> 4*
    d0(1) -> 1*
    1 -> 16,5
    7 -> 4*
    18 -> 21*
    20 -> 4*
    23 -> 19*
  problem:

  Qed

Tool IRC1

Execution Time	Unknown
Answer	YES(?,O(n^1))
Input	Secret 06 SRS secr3

stdout:

YES(?,O(n^1))

Tool IRC2

Execution Time	Unknown
Answer	YES(?,O(n^1))
Input	Secret 06 SRS secr3

stdout:

YES(?,O(n^1))

'Fastest (timeout of 60.0 seconds)'
-----------------------------------
Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
Input Problem:    innermost runtime-complexity with respect to
  Rules:
    {  a(b(a(x1))) -> b(c(x1))
     , b(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(x1))
     , c(x1) -> a(b(x1))
     , c(d(x1)) -> d(c(b(a(x1))))}

Proof Output:
  'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' proved the best result:

  Details:
  --------
    'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' succeeded with the following output:
     'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
     --------------------------------------------------------------
     Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
     Input Problem:    innermost runtime-complexity with respect to
       Rules:
         {  a(b(a(x1))) -> b(c(x1))
          , b(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(x1))
          , c(x1) -> a(b(x1))
          , c(d(x1)) -> d(c(b(a(x1))))}

     Proof Output:
       The problem is match-bounded by 2.
       The enriched problem is compatible with the following automaton:
       {  a_0(2) -> 1
        , a_1(2) -> 6
        , a_1(3) -> 1
        , a_2(7) -> 4
        , b_0(2) -> 1
        , b_1(2) -> 3
        , b_1(6) -> 5
        , b_2(5) -> 7
        , c_0(2) -> 1
        , c_1(5) -> 4
        , d_0(2) -> 2
        , d_1(4) -> 1}

Tool RC1

Execution Time	Unknown
Answer	YES(?,O(n^1))
Input	Secret 06 SRS secr3

stdout:

YES(?,O(n^1))

Tool RC2

Execution Time	Unknown
Answer	YES(?,O(n^1))
Input	Secret 06 SRS secr3

stdout:

YES(?,O(n^1))

'Fastest (timeout of 60.0 seconds)'
-----------------------------------
Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
Input Problem:    runtime-complexity with respect to
  Rules:
    {  a(b(a(x1))) -> b(c(x1))
     , b(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(x1))
     , c(x1) -> a(b(x1))
     , c(d(x1)) -> d(c(b(a(x1))))}

Proof Output:
  'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' proved the best result:

  Details:
  --------
    'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' succeeded with the following output:
     'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
     --------------------------------------------------------------
     Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
     Input Problem:    runtime-complexity with respect to
       Rules:
         {  a(b(a(x1))) -> b(c(x1))
          , b(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(x1))
          , c(x1) -> a(b(x1))
          , c(d(x1)) -> d(c(b(a(x1))))}

     Proof Output:
       The problem is match-bounded by 2.
       The enriched problem is compatible with the following automaton:
       {  a_0(2) -> 1
        , a_1(2) -> 6
        , a_1(3) -> 1
        , a_2(7) -> 4
        , b_0(2) -> 1
        , b_1(2) -> 3
        , b_1(6) -> 5
        , b_2(5) -> 7
        , c_0(2) -> 1
        , c_1(5) -> 4
        , d_0(2) -> 2
        , d_1(4) -> 1}