5.17/2.13	YES
5.17/2.14	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.c
5.17/2.14	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	Termination of the given C Problem could be proven:
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(0) C Problem
5.17/2.14	(1) CToIRSProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
5.17/2.14	(2) IntTRS
5.17/2.14	(3) TerminationGraphProcessor [SOUND, 48 ms]
5.17/2.14	(4) IntTRS
5.17/2.14	(5) IntTRSCompressionProof [EQUIVALENT, 40 ms]
5.17/2.14	(6) IntTRS
5.17/2.14	(7) IntTRSUnneededArgumentFilterProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
5.17/2.14	(8) IntTRS
5.17/2.14	(9) PolynomialOrderProcessor [EQUIVALENT, 7 ms]
5.17/2.14	(10) YES
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(0)
5.17/2.14	Obligation:
5.17/2.14	c file /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.c
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(1) CToIRSProof (EQUIVALENT)
5.17/2.14	Parsed C Integer Program as IRS.
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(2)
5.17/2.14	Obligation:
5.17/2.14	Rules:
5.17/2.14	f1(x, y, z) -> f2(x_1, y, z) :|: TRUE
5.17/2.14	f2(x1, x2, x3) -> f3(x1, x4, x3) :|: TRUE
5.17/2.14	f3(x5, x6, x7) -> f4(x5, x6, x8) :|: TRUE
5.17/2.14	f5(x9, x10, x11) -> f6(arith, x10, x11) :|: TRUE && arith = x9 + x10 + x11
5.17/2.14	f6(x24, x25, x26) -> f7(x24, x27, x26) :|: TRUE && x27 = 0 - x26 - 1
5.17/2.14	f4(x15, x16, x17) -> f5(x15, x16, x17) :|: x15 >= 0 && x15 + x16 >= 0
5.17/2.14	f7(x18, x19, x20) -> f4(x18, x19, x20) :|: TRUE
5.17/2.14	f4(x21, x22, x23) -> f8(x21, x22, x23) :|: x21 < 0
5.17/2.14	f4(x28, x29, x30) -> f8(x28, x29, x30) :|: x28 + x29 < 0
5.17/2.14	Start term: f1(x, y, z)
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(3) TerminationGraphProcessor (SOUND)
5.17/2.14	Constructed the termination graph and obtained one non-trivial SCC.
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(4)
5.17/2.14	Obligation:
5.17/2.14	Rules:
5.17/2.14	f4(x15, x16, x17) -> f5(x15, x16, x17) :|: x15 >= 0 && x15 + x16 >= 0
5.17/2.14	f7(x18, x19, x20) -> f4(x18, x19, x20) :|: TRUE
5.17/2.14	f6(x24, x25, x26) -> f7(x24, x27, x26) :|: TRUE && x27 = 0 - x26 - 1
5.17/2.14	f5(x9, x10, x11) -> f6(arith, x10, x11) :|: TRUE && arith = x9 + x10 + x11
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(5) IntTRSCompressionProof (EQUIVALENT)
5.17/2.14	Compressed rules.
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(6)
5.17/2.14	Obligation:
5.17/2.14	Rules:
5.17/2.14	f6(x24:0, x25:0, x26:0) -> f6(x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) + x26:0, 0 - x26:0 - 1, x26:0) :|: x24:0 > -1 && x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) >= 0
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(7) IntTRSUnneededArgumentFilterProof (EQUIVALENT)
5.17/2.14	Some arguments are removed because they cannot influence termination. We removed arguments according to the following replacements:
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	   f6(x1, x2, x3) -> f6(x1, x3)
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(8)
5.17/2.14	Obligation:
5.17/2.14	Rules:
5.17/2.14	f6(x24:0, x26:0) -> f6(x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) + x26:0, x26:0) :|: x24:0 > -1 && x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) >= 0
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(9) PolynomialOrderProcessor (EQUIVALENT)
5.17/2.14	Found the following polynomial interpretation:
5.17/2.14	[f6(x, x1)] = x
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	The following rules are decreasing:
5.17/2.14	f6(x24:0, x26:0) -> f6(x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) + x26:0, x26:0) :|: x24:0 > -1 && x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) >= 0
5.17/2.14	The following rules are bounded:
5.17/2.14	f6(x24:0, x26:0) -> f6(x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) + x26:0, x26:0) :|: x24:0 > -1 && x24:0 + (0 - x26:0 - 1) >= 0
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	----------------------------------------
5.17/2.14	
5.17/2.14	(10)
5.17/2.14	YES
5.46/2.18	EOF