7.89/2.90	NO
9.65/3.29	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
9.65/3.29	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven:
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	(0) QTRS
9.65/3.29	(1) NonTerminationProof [COMPLETE, 619 ms]
9.65/3.29	(2) NO
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	----------------------------------------
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	(0)
9.65/3.29	Obligation:
9.65/3.29	Q restricted rewrite system:
9.65/3.29	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	   b(a(x1)) -> a(b(x1))
9.65/3.29	   c(c(x1)) -> a(b(c(x1)))
9.65/3.29	   c(b(x1)) -> b(c(x1))
9.65/3.29	   a(a(x1)) -> b(a(c(x1)))
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	Q is empty.
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	----------------------------------------
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	(1) NonTerminationProof (COMPLETE)
9.65/3.29	We used the non-termination processor [OPPELT08] to show that the SRS problem is infinite.
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	Found the self-embedding DerivationStructure: 
9.65/3.29	"a c (b)^k c -> b a c (b)^k+1 c"
9.65/3.29	a c (b)^k c -> b a c (b)^k+1 c
9.65/3.29	by Overlap u with l (ol4)"c (b)^k c -> a (b)^k+1 c
9.65/3.29	by Equivalent"c (b)^k c -> a (b)^k b c
9.65/3.29	by Overlapping Derivationstructures"c (b)^k c -> (b)^k a b c
9.65/3.29	by Overlap u with r (ol3)"c (b)^k -> (b)^k c
9.65/3.29	by Selfoverlapping OC am2"c b -> b c
9.65/3.29	by original rule (OC 1)"""c c -> a b c
9.65/3.29	by original rule (OC 1)"""(b)^k a -> a (b)^k
9.65/3.29	by Selfoverlapping OC am1"b a -> a b
9.65/3.29	by original rule (OC 1)"""""a a -> b a c
9.65/3.29	by original rule (OC 1)"
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	----------------------------------------
9.65/3.29	
9.65/3.29	(2)
9.65/3.29	NO
9.84/3.38	EOF