/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) Overlay + Local Confluence [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QDP (5) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) AND (7) QDP (8) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (9) QDP (10) QReductionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (11) QDP (12) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (13) YES (14) QDP (15) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (16) QDP (17) QReductionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (18) QDP (19) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) QDP (21) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (22) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X div(0, s(Y)) -> 0 div(s(X), s(Y)) -> s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT) The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X div(0, s(Y)) -> 0 div(s(X), s(Y)) -> s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))) The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) -> P(minus(X, Y)) MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y) DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y)) DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y) The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X div(0, s(Y)) -> 0 div(s(X), s(Y)) -> s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))) The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (6) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y) The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X div(0, s(Y)) -> 0 div(s(X), s(Y)) -> s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))) The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (9) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (10) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT) We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN]. minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y) R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (12) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs: *MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2 ---------------------------------------- (13) YES ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X div(0, s(Y)) -> 0 div(s(X), s(Y)) -> s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))) The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (15) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (16) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (17) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT) We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN]. div(0, s(x0)) div(s(x0), s(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (18) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (19) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y)) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order. DIV(x1, x2) = x1 s(x1) = s(x1) minus(x1, x2) = x1 p(x1) = x1 Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:trivial and weight map: s_1=1 dummyConstant=1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X ---------------------------------------- (20) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: minus(X, 0) -> X minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> p(minus(X, Y)) p(s(X)) -> X The set Q consists of the following terms: minus(x0, 0) minus(s(x0), s(x1)) p(s(x0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (21) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (22) YES