3.44/1.65	NO
3.44/1.66	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.44/1.66	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven:
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	(0) QTRS
3.44/1.66	(1) NonTerminationProof [COMPLETE, 45 ms]
3.44/1.66	(2) NO
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	----------------------------------------
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	(0)
3.44/1.66	Obligation:
3.44/1.66	Q restricted rewrite system:
3.44/1.66	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	   a(x1) -> x1
3.44/1.66	   a(b(x1)) -> b(a(c(b(a(x1)))))
3.44/1.66	   b(x1) -> a(x1)
3.44/1.66	   c(c(x1)) -> x1
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	Q is empty.
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	----------------------------------------
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	(1) NonTerminationProof (COMPLETE)
3.44/1.66	We used the non-termination processor [OPPELT08] to show that the SRS problem is infinite.
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	Found the self-embedding DerivationStructure: 
3.44/1.66	"a b c b -> a b c b"
3.44/1.66	a b c b -> a b c b
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b c b -> b b c b
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b c -> b a
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a c
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a c b
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a c b a
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)""a -> 
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)"""b -> 
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 2"b -> a
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)""a -> 
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)""""c c -> 
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)"""a b -> b c b
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> b a c b
3.44/1.66	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> b a c b a
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)""a -> 
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)"""a -> 
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)""""b -> a
3.44/1.66	by original rule (OC 1)"
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	----------------------------------------
3.44/1.66	
3.44/1.66	(2)
3.44/1.66	NO
3.65/1.71	EOF