/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) Overlay + Local Confluence [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof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) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: sort(nil) -> nil sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y)) insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil) insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v) choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z) 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: sort(nil) -> nil sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y)) insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil) insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v) choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The set Q consists of the following terms: sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) ---------------------------------------- (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: SORT(cons(x, y)) -> INSERT(x, sort(y)) SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y) INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v) CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w) CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The TRS R consists of the following rules: sort(nil) -> nil sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y)) insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil) insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v) choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The set Q consists of the following terms: sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) 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 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (6) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w) INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v) CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The TRS R consists of the following rules: sort(nil) -> nil sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y)) insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil) insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v) choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The set Q consists of the following terms: sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) 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: CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w) INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v) CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) 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]. sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w) INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v) CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z) 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: *INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v) The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 >= 2, 1 >= 3, 2 > 4 *CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 >= 2, 3 > 3, 4 > 4 *CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w) 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: SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y) The TRS R consists of the following rules: sort(nil) -> nil sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y)) insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil) insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v) choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w)) choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z) The set Q consists of the following terms: sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) 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: SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) 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]. sort(nil) sort(cons(x0, x1)) insert(x0, nil) insert(x0, cons(x1, x2)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), x3, 0) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), 0, s(x3)) choose(x0, cons(x1, x2), s(x3), s(x4)) ---------------------------------------- (18) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(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: *SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 ---------------------------------------- (20) YES