4.90/2.00 YES 4.90/2.01 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml 4.90/2.01 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 Termination of the given RelTRS could be proven: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (0) RelTRS 4.90/2.01 (1) RelTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] 4.90/2.01 (2) RelTRS 4.90/2.01 (3) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 36 ms] 4.90/2.01 (4) RelTRS 4.90/2.01 (5) RIsEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] 4.90/2.01 (6) YES 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (0) 4.90/2.01 Obligation: 4.90/2.01 Relative term rewrite system: 4.90/2.01 The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 c(c(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(b(c(x1))) -> a(c(b(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(a(b(x1))) -> c(c(b(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 b(a(a(x1))) -> a(a(b(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(b(a(x1))) -> a(a(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (1) RelTRS Reverse (EQUIVALENT) 4.90/2.01 We have reversed the following relative TRS [REVERSE]: 4.90/2.01 The set of rules R is 4.90/2.01 c(c(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(b(c(x1))) -> a(c(b(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(a(b(x1))) -> c(c(b(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 The set of rules S is 4.90/2.01 b(a(a(x1))) -> a(a(b(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(b(a(x1))) -> a(a(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 We have obtained the following relative TRS: 4.90/2.01 The set of rules R is 4.90/2.01 c(c(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 c(b(b(x1))) -> b(c(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(a(b(x1))) -> b(c(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 The set of rules S is 4.90/2.01 a(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 a(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 a(b(b(x1))) -> c(a(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (2) 4.90/2.01 Obligation: 4.90/2.01 Relative term rewrite system: 4.90/2.01 The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 c(c(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 c(b(b(x1))) -> b(c(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(a(b(x1))) -> b(c(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 a(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 a(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 a(b(b(x1))) -> c(a(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (3) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) 4.90/2.01 We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: 4.90/2.01 Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:a_1 > c_1 > b_1 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 and weight map: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 c_1=1 4.90/2.01 b_1=1 4.90/2.01 a_1=1 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 The variable weight is 1With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: 4.90/2.01 Rules from R: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 c(c(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 c(b(b(x1))) -> b(c(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 b(a(b(x1))) -> b(c(c(x1))) 4.90/2.01 Rules from S: 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 a(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 a(b(b(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 a(b(b(x1))) -> c(a(a(x1))) 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (4) 4.90/2.01 Obligation: 4.90/2.01 Relative term rewrite system: 4.90/2.01 R is empty. 4.90/2.01 S is empty. 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (5) RIsEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) 4.90/2.01 The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven. 4.90/2.01 ---------------------------------------- 4.90/2.01 4.90/2.01 (6) 4.90/2.01 YES 5.10/2.05 EOF