3.44/1.73 YES 3.44/1.74 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml 3.44/1.74 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 (0) QTRS 3.44/1.74 (1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] 3.44/1.74 (2) QDP 3.44/1.74 (3) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] 3.44/1.74 (4) TRUE 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 ---------------------------------------- 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 (0) 3.44/1.74 Obligation: 3.44/1.74 Q restricted rewrite system: 3.44/1.74 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 f(a(x), y) -> g(x, y) 3.44/1.74 g(b, y) -> f(y, y) 3.44/1.74 a(b) -> c 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 The set Q consists of the following terms: 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 f(a(x0), x1) 3.44/1.74 g(b, x0) 3.44/1.74 a(b) 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 ---------------------------------------- 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 (1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) 3.44/1.74 Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. 3.44/1.74 ---------------------------------------- 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 (2) 3.44/1.74 Obligation: 3.44/1.74 Q DP problem: 3.44/1.74 The TRS P consists of the following rules: 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 F(a(x), y) -> G(x, y) 3.44/1.74 G(b, y) -> F(y, y) 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 The TRS R consists of the following rules: 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 f(a(x), y) -> g(x, y) 3.44/1.74 g(b, y) -> f(y, y) 3.44/1.74 a(b) -> c 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 The set Q consists of the following terms: 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 f(a(x0), x1) 3.44/1.74 g(b, x0) 3.44/1.74 a(b) 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. 3.44/1.74 ---------------------------------------- 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 (3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) 3.44/1.74 The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes. 3.44/1.74 ---------------------------------------- 3.44/1.74 3.44/1.74 (4) 3.44/1.74 TRUE 3.44/1.76 EOF