/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty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) QTRSToCSRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(2) CSR
(3) CSRRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 50 ms]
(4) CSR
(5) CSRRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(6) CSR
(7) RisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(8) YES


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

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

   active(f(b, X, c)) -> mark(f(X, c, X))
   active(c) -> mark(b)
   active(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(X1, active(X2), X3)
   f(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
   proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
   proper(b) -> ok(b)
   proper(c) -> ok(c)
   f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
   top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
   top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Q is empty.

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

(1) QTRSToCSRProof (EQUIVALENT)
The following Q TRS is given: Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   active(f(b, X, c)) -> mark(f(X, c, X))
   active(c) -> mark(b)
   active(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(X1, active(X2), X3)
   f(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
   proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
   proper(b) -> ok(b)
   proper(c) -> ok(c)
   f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
   top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
   top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Q is empty.
Special symbols used for the transformation (see [GM04]):
top: top_1, active: active_1, mark: mark_1, ok: ok_1, proper: proper_1
The replacement map contains the following entries:

f: {2}
b: empty set
c: empty set
The QTRS contained all rules created by the complete Giesl-Middeldorp transformation. Therefore, the inverse transformation is complete (and sound).
----------------------------------------

(2)
Obligation:
Context-sensitive rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X)
   c -> b

The replacement map contains the following entries:

f: {2}
b: empty set
c: empty set

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

(3) CSRRRRProof (EQUIVALENT)
The following CSR is given: Context-sensitive rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X)
   c -> b

The replacement map contains the following entries:

f: {2}
b: empty set
c: empty set
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

   POL(b) = 1
   POL(c) = 2
   POL(f(x_1, x_2, x_3)) = 2*x_2 + 2*x_3
With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

   c -> b




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

(4)
Obligation:
Context-sensitive rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X)

The replacement map contains the following entries:

f: {2}
b: empty set
c: empty set

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

(5) CSRRRRProof (EQUIVALENT)
The following CSR is given: Context-sensitive rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X)

The replacement map contains the following entries:

f: {2}
b: empty set
c: empty set
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

   POL(b) = 1
   POL(c) = 0
   POL(f(x_1, x_2, x_3)) = x_1 + x_2
With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

   f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X)




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

(6)
Obligation:
Context-sensitive rewrite system:
R is empty.

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

(7) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT)
The CSR R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven.
----------------------------------------

(8)
YES