3.82/1.71	NO
3.82/1.73	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.82/1.73	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven:
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	(0) QTRS
3.82/1.73	(1) NonTerminationProof [COMPLETE, 0 ms]
3.82/1.73	(2) NO
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	----------------------------------------
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	(0)
3.82/1.73	Obligation:
3.82/1.73	Q restricted rewrite system:
3.82/1.73	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	   a(x1) -> x1
3.82/1.73	   a(b(x1)) -> b(a(a(c(b(a(x1))))))
3.82/1.73	   b(x1) -> x1
3.82/1.73	   c(c(x1)) -> x1
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	Q is empty.
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	----------------------------------------
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	(1) NonTerminationProof (COMPLETE)
3.82/1.73	We used the non-termination processor [OPPELT08] to show that the SRS problem is infinite.
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	Found the self-embedding DerivationStructure: 
3.82/1.73	"a b c b -> a b c b"
3.82/1.73	a b c b -> a b c b
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b c b -> a b a c b
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b c -> a a
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> a a c
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> b a a c
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a a c b
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a a c b a
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)""a -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)"""b -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)"""b -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)"""c c -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)"""a b -> b a c b
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> b a a c b
3.82/1.73	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a a c b a
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)""a -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)"""a -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)""""a -> 
3.82/1.73	by original rule (OC 1)"
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	----------------------------------------
3.82/1.73	
3.82/1.73	(2)
3.82/1.73	NO
3.98/1.76	EOF