/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# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QTRS (5) AAECC Innermost [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) QTRS (7) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) QDP (9) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) QDP (11) QReductionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (12) QDP (13) NonTerminationLoopProof [COMPLETE, 0 ms] (14) NO ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: eq -> true eq -> eq eq -> false inf(X) -> cons take(0, X) -> nil take(s, cons) -> cons length(nil) -> 0 length(cons) -> s Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(0) = 0 POL(cons) = 0 POL(eq) = 2 POL(false) = 2 POL(inf(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(length(x_1)) = x_1 POL(nil) = 0 POL(s) = 0 POL(take(x_1, x_2)) = 2*x_1 + x_2 POL(true) = 2 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: inf(X) -> cons ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: eq -> true eq -> eq eq -> false take(0, X) -> nil take(s, cons) -> cons length(nil) -> 0 length(cons) -> s Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:length_1 > cons > s > eq > false > nil > 0 > take_2 > true and weight map: eq=1 true=1 false=1 0=2 nil=1 s=2 cons=1 length_1=1 take_2=0 The variable weight is 1With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: eq -> true eq -> false take(0, X) -> nil take(s, cons) -> cons length(nil) -> 0 length(cons) -> s ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: eq -> eq Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (5) AAECC Innermost (EQUIVALENT) We have applied [NOC,AAECCNOC] to switch to innermost. The TRS R 1 is none The TRS R 2 is eq -> eq The signature Sigma is {eq} ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: eq -> eq The set Q consists of the following terms: eq ---------------------------------------- (7) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: EQ -> EQ The TRS R consists of the following rules: eq -> eq The set Q consists of the following terms: eq We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) 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. ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: EQ -> EQ R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: eq We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) 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]. eq ---------------------------------------- (12) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: EQ -> EQ R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (13) NonTerminationLoopProof (COMPLETE) We used the non-termination processor [FROCOS05] to show that the DP problem is infinite. Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly. s = EQ evaluates to t =EQ Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions: * Matcher: [ ] * Semiunifier: [ ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rewriting sequence The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from EQ to EQ. ---------------------------------------- (14) NO