19.20/5.64 YES 19.20/5.65 proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml 19.20/5.65 # AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 Termination of the given RelTRS could be proven: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (0) RelTRS 19.20/5.65 (1) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 653 ms] 19.20/5.65 (2) RelTRS 19.20/5.65 (3) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 13 ms] 19.20/5.65 (4) RelTRS 19.20/5.65 (5) RIsEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] 19.20/5.65 (6) YES 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (0) 19.20/5.65 Obligation: 19.20/5.65 Relative term rewrite system: 19.20/5.65 The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 a(b(a(x1))) -> c(c(c(x1))) 19.20/5.65 c(c(c(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 a(x1) -> b(c(b(x1))) 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (1) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) 19.20/5.65 We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: 19.20/5.65 Matrix interpretation [MATRO] to (N^6, +, *, >=, >) : 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 <<< 19.20/5.65 POL(a(x_1)) = [[0], [0], [1], [0], [0], [0]] + [[1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0]] * x_1 19.20/5.65 >>> 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 <<< 19.20/5.65 POL(b(x_1)) = [[0], [0], [0], [0], [0], [0]] + [[1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]] * x_1 19.20/5.65 >>> 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 <<< 19.20/5.65 POL(c(x_1)) = [[0], [0], [0], [0], [0], [1]] + [[1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]] * x_1 19.20/5.65 >>> 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: 19.20/5.65 Rules from R: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 a(b(a(x1))) -> c(c(c(x1))) 19.20/5.65 Rules from S: 19.20/5.65 none 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (2) 19.20/5.65 Obligation: 19.20/5.65 Relative term rewrite system: 19.20/5.65 The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 c(c(c(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 a(x1) -> b(c(b(x1))) 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (3) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) 19.20/5.65 We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: 19.20/5.65 Matrix interpretation [MATRO] to (N^2, +, *, >=, >) : 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 <<< 19.20/5.65 POL(c(x_1)) = [[0], [1]] + [[1, 2], [0, 0]] * x_1 19.20/5.65 >>> 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 <<< 19.20/5.65 POL(a(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 19.20/5.65 >>> 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 <<< 19.20/5.65 POL(b(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 19.20/5.65 >>> 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: 19.20/5.65 Rules from R: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 c(c(c(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) 19.20/5.65 Rules from S: 19.20/5.65 none 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (4) 19.20/5.65 Obligation: 19.20/5.65 Relative term rewrite system: 19.20/5.65 R is empty. 19.20/5.65 The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 a(x1) -> b(c(b(x1))) 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (5) RIsEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) 19.20/5.65 The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven. 19.20/5.65 ---------------------------------------- 19.20/5.65 19.20/5.65 (6) 19.20/5.65 YES 19.56/5.68 EOF