/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO 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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven: (0) QTRS (1) AAECC Innermost [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT,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) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) YES (21) QDP (22) MNOCProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (23) QDP (24) NonLoopProof [COMPLETE, 122 ms] (25) NO ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) AAECC Innermost (EQUIVALENT) We have applied [NOC,AAECCNOC] to switch to innermost. The TRS R 1 is eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) The TRS R 2 is f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) The signature Sigma is {f_2} ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) ---------------------------------------- (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: F(tt, x) -> F(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) F(tt, x) -> EQ(toOne(x), s(0)) F(tt, x) -> TOONE(x) EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y) TOONE(s(s(x))) -> TOONE(s(x)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 3 SCCs with 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (6) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: TOONE(s(s(x))) -> TOONE(s(x)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) 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: TOONE(s(s(x))) -> TOONE(s(x)) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) 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]. f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: TOONE(s(s(x))) -> TOONE(s(x)) 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: *TOONE(s(s(x))) -> TOONE(s(x)) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 ---------------------------------------- (13) YES ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) 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: EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) 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]. f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) ---------------------------------------- (18) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y) R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (19) 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: *EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2 ---------------------------------------- (20) YES ---------------------------------------- (21) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: F(tt, x) -> F(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) The set Q consists of the following terms: f(tt, x0) eq(s(x0), s(x1)) eq(0, 0) toOne(s(s(x0))) toOne(s(0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (22) MNOCProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the modular non-overlap check [FROCOS05] to decrease Q to the empty set. ---------------------------------------- (23) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: F(tt, x) -> F(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(tt, x) -> f(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x)) eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y) eq(0, 0) -> tt toOne(s(s(x))) -> toOne(s(x)) toOne(s(0)) -> s(0) Q is empty. We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (24) NonLoopProof (COMPLETE) By Theorem 8 [NONLOOP] we deduce infiniteness of the QDP. We apply the theorem with m = 1, b = 1, σ' = [ ], and μ' = [ ] on the rule F(tt, s(s(zr0)))[zr0 / s(zr0)]^n[zr0 / 0] -> F(tt, s(s(s(zr0))))[zr0 / s(zr0)]^n[zr0 / 0] This rule is correct for the QDP as the following derivation shows: F(tt, s(s(zr0)))[zr0 / s(zr0)]^n[zr0 / 0] -> F(tt, s(s(s(zr0))))[zr0 / s(zr0)]^n[zr0 / 0] by Equivalence by Domain Renaming of the lhs with [zl0 / zr0] intermediate steps: Equiv DR (rhs) - Equiv DR (lhs) F(tt, s(s(zl1)))[zl1 / s(zl1)]^n[zl1 / 0] -> F(tt, s(s(s(zr1))))[zr1 / s(zr1)]^n[zr1 / 0] by Rewrite t with the rewrite sequence : [([0],eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)), ([0],eq(0, 0) -> tt)] intermediate steps: Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv IPS (lhs) F(tt, s(s(zl1)))[zr1 / s(zr1), zl1 / s(zl1)]^n[zr1 / 0, zl1 / 0] -> F(eq(s(0), s(0)), s(s(s(zr1))))[zr1 / s(zr1), zl1 / s(zl1)]^n[zr1 / 0, zl1 / 0] by Narrowing at position: [0,0] intermediate steps: Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv IPS (lhs) - Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv IPS (lhs) - Instantiation - Equiv DR (rhs) - Equiv DR (lhs) - Instantiation - Equiv DR (rhs) - Equiv DR (lhs) F(tt, s(s(zs1)))[zs1 / s(zs1)]^n[zs1 / y0] -> F(eq(toOne(s(y0)), s(0)), s(s(s(zs1))))[zs1 / s(zs1)]^n[zs1 / y0] by Narrowing at position: [0,0] intermediate steps: Instantiate mu - Instantiate Sigma - Instantiation - Instantiation F(tt, x)[ ]^n[ ] -> F(eq(toOne(x), s(0)), s(x))[ ]^n[ ] by Rule from TRS P intermediate steps: Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv DR (lhs) - Instantiation - Equiv DR (lhs) toOne(s(s(x)))[x / s(x)]^n[ ] -> toOne(s(x))[ ]^n[ ] by PatternCreation I with delta: [ ], theta: [ ], sigma: [x / s(x)] toOne(s(s(x)))[ ]^n[ ] -> toOne(s(x))[ ]^n[ ] by Rule from TRS R intermediate steps: Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv IPS (lhs) - Equiv IPS (rhs) - Equiv IPS (lhs) toOne(s(0))[ ]^n[ ] -> s(0)[ ]^n[ ] by Rule from TRS R ---------------------------------------- (25) NO