3.27/1.68	YES
3.27/1.68	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.27/1.68	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	(0) QTRS
3.27/1.68	(1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 1 ms]
3.27/1.68	(2) QDP
3.27/1.68	(3) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
3.27/1.68	(4) TRUE
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	----------------------------------------
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	(0)
3.27/1.68	Obligation:
3.27/1.68	Q restricted rewrite system:
3.27/1.68	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	   f(0, 1, X) -> f(X, X, X)
3.27/1.68	   g(X, Y) -> X
3.27/1.68	   g(X, Y) -> Y
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	The set Q consists of the following terms:
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	   f(0, 1, x0)
3.27/1.68	   g(x0, x1)
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	----------------------------------------
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT)
3.27/1.68	Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.
3.27/1.68	----------------------------------------
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	(2)
3.27/1.68	Obligation:
3.27/1.68	Q DP problem:
3.27/1.68	The TRS P consists of the following rules:
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	   F(0, 1, X) -> F(X, X, X)
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	   f(0, 1, X) -> f(X, X, X)
3.27/1.68	   g(X, Y) -> X
3.27/1.68	   g(X, Y) -> Y
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	The set Q consists of the following terms:
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	   f(0, 1, x0)
3.27/1.68	   g(x0, x1)
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
3.27/1.68	----------------------------------------
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT)
3.27/1.68	The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.
3.27/1.68	----------------------------------------
3.27/1.68	
3.27/1.68	(4)
3.27/1.68	TRUE
3.27/1.69	EOF