/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty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) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(2) QDP
(3) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(4) QDP
(5) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(6) QDP
(7) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 28 ms]
(8) QDP
(9) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(10) YES


----------------------------------------

(0)
Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(a, f(a, x)) -> f(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))

Q is empty.

----------------------------------------

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT)
Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.
----------------------------------------

(2)
Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))
   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(x, f(f(a, a), a))
   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(f(a, a), a)
   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(a, a)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(a, f(a, x)) -> f(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 3 less nodes.
----------------------------------------

(4)
Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(a, f(a, x)) -> f(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(5) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT)
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.
----------------------------------------

(6)
Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(7) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

   F(a, f(a, x)) -> F(a, f(x, f(f(a, a), a)))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering:  Polynomial interpretation [POLO,RATPOLO]:

   POL(F(x_1, x_2)) = [1/4]x_2
   POL(a) = [1/4]
   POL(f(x_1, x_2)) = [1/4]x_1 + [1/4]x_2
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 5/512.
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:
none


----------------------------------------

(8)
Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(9) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
----------------------------------------

(10)
YES