3.21/1.57	NO
3.21/1.60	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml
3.21/1.60	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven:
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	(0) QTRS
3.21/1.60	(1) NonTerminationProof [COMPLETE, 0 ms]
3.21/1.60	(2) NO
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	(0)
3.21/1.60	Obligation:
3.21/1.60	Q restricted rewrite system:
3.21/1.60	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	   a(x1) -> x1
3.21/1.60	   a(b(x1)) -> a(a(c(b(b(a(x1))))))
3.21/1.60	   b(x1) -> x1
3.21/1.60	   c(c(x1)) -> x1
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	Q is empty.
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	(1) NonTerminationProof (COMPLETE)
3.21/1.60	We used the non-termination processor [OPPELT08] to show that the SRS problem is infinite.
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	Found the self-embedding DerivationStructure: 
3.21/1.60	"a b b -> a a b b a"
3.21/1.60	a b b -> a a b b a
3.21/1.60	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b b -> a a c c b b a
3.21/1.60	by OverlapClosure OC 2"a b -> a a c a
3.21/1.60	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> a a c b a
3.21/1.60	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> a a c b b a
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)""b -> 
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)"""b -> 
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)"""a b -> c b b a
3.21/1.60	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> a c b b a
3.21/1.60	by OverlapClosure OC 3"a b -> a a c b b a
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)""a -> 
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)"""a -> 
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)""""c c -> 
3.21/1.60	by original rule (OC 1)"
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	----------------------------------------
3.21/1.60	
3.21/1.60	(2)
3.21/1.60	NO
3.48/1.64	EOF