/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) Overlay + Local Confluence [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof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, 13 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) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) QDP (21) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (22) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: p(0) -> 0 p(s(x)) -> x le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) minus(x, 0) -> x minus(x, s(y)) -> if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y))))) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> 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: p(0) -> 0 p(s(x)) -> x le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) minus(x, 0) -> x minus(x, s(y)) -> if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y))))) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> y The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, 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: LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(x, y) MINUS(x, s(y)) -> IF(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y))))) MINUS(x, s(y)) -> LE(x, s(y)) MINUS(x, s(y)) -> P(minus(x, p(s(y)))) MINUS(x, s(y)) -> MINUS(x, p(s(y))) MINUS(x, s(y)) -> P(s(y)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: p(0) -> 0 p(s(x)) -> x le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) minus(x, 0) -> x minus(x, s(y)) -> if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y))))) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> y The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, 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 4 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (6) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(x, y) The TRS R consists of the following rules: p(0) -> 0 p(s(x)) -> x le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) minus(x, 0) -> x minus(x, s(y)) -> if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y))))) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> y The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, 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: LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(x, y) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, 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]. p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, x1) ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(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: *LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(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: MINUS(x, s(y)) -> MINUS(x, p(s(y))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: p(0) -> 0 p(s(x)) -> x le(0, y) -> true le(s(x), 0) -> false le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y) minus(x, 0) -> x minus(x, s(y)) -> if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y))))) if(true, x, y) -> x if(false, x, y) -> y The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, 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: MINUS(x, s(y)) -> MINUS(x, p(s(y))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: p(s(x)) -> x The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, 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]. le(0, x0) le(s(x0), 0) le(s(x0), s(x1)) minus(x0, 0) minus(x0, s(x1)) if(true, x0, x1) if(false, x0, x1) ---------------------------------------- (18) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MINUS(x, s(y)) -> MINUS(x, p(s(y))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: p(s(x)) -> x The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (19) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented. Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R: p(s(x)) -> x Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(MINUS(x_1, x_2)) = x_1 + 2*x_2 POL(p(x_1)) = x_1 POL(s(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 ---------------------------------------- (20) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MINUS(x, s(y)) -> MINUS(x, p(s(y))) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: p(0) p(s(x0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (21) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (22) TRUE