3.74/1.72	YES
3.74/1.74	proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.pl
3.74/1.74	# AProVE Commit ID: 48fb2092695e11cc9f56e44b17a92a5f88ffb256 marcel 20180622 unpublished dirty
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	Left Termination of the query pattern
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less(g,a)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	w.r.t. the given Prolog program could successfully be proven:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(0) Prolog
3.74/1.74	(1) PrologToPiTRSProof [SOUND, 0 ms]
3.74/1.74	(2) PiTRS
3.74/1.74	(3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
3.74/1.74	(4) PiDP
3.74/1.74	(5) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
3.74/1.74	(6) PiDP
3.74/1.74	(7) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
3.74/1.74	(8) PiDP
3.74/1.74	(9) PiDPToQDPProof [SOUND, 0 ms]
3.74/1.74	(10) QDP
3.74/1.74	(11) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
3.74/1.74	(12) YES
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(0)
3.74/1.74	Obligation:
3.74/1.74	Clauses:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less(0, s(X1)).
3.74/1.74	less(s(X), s(Y)) :- less(X, Y).
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	Query: less(g,a)
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(1) PrologToPiTRSProof (SOUND)
3.74/1.74	We use the technique of [TOCL09]. With regard to the inferred argument filtering the predicates were used in the following modes:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less_in_2: (b,f)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	Transforming Prolog into the following Term Rewriting System:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	Pi-finite rewrite system:
3.74/1.74	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(0, s(X1)) -> less_out_ga(0, s(X1))
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_ga(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   U1_ga(X, Y, less_out_ga(X, Y)) -> less_out_ga(s(X), s(Y))
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
3.74/1.74	less_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_in_ga(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	0  =  0
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_out_ga
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	s(x1)  =  s(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_ga(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	Infinitary Constructor Rewriting Termination of PiTRS implies Termination of Prolog
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(2)
3.74/1.74	Obligation:
3.74/1.74	Pi-finite rewrite system:
3.74/1.74	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(0, s(X1)) -> less_out_ga(0, s(X1))
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_ga(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   U1_ga(X, Y, less_out_ga(X, Y)) -> less_out_ga(s(X), s(Y))
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
3.74/1.74	less_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_in_ga(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	0  =  0
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_out_ga
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	s(x1)  =  s(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_ga(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT)
3.74/1.74	Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LOPSTR] we result in the following initial DP problem:
3.74/1.74	Pi DP problem:
3.74/1.74	The TRS P consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_GA(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X), s(Y)) -> LESS_IN_GA(X, Y)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(0, s(X1)) -> less_out_ga(0, s(X1))
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_ga(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   U1_ga(X, Y, less_out_ga(X, Y)) -> less_out_ga(s(X), s(Y))
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
3.74/1.74	less_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_in_ga(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	0  =  0
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_out_ga
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	s(x1)  =  s(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_ga(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	LESS_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  LESS_IN_GA(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_GA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_GA(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(4)
3.74/1.74	Obligation:
3.74/1.74	Pi DP problem:
3.74/1.74	The TRS P consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_GA(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X), s(Y)) -> LESS_IN_GA(X, Y)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(0, s(X1)) -> less_out_ga(0, s(X1))
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_ga(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   U1_ga(X, Y, less_out_ga(X, Y)) -> less_out_ga(s(X), s(Y))
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
3.74/1.74	less_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_in_ga(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	0  =  0
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_out_ga
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	s(x1)  =  s(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_ga(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	LESS_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  LESS_IN_GA(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_GA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_GA(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT)
3.74/1.74	The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(6)
3.74/1.74	Obligation:
3.74/1.74	Pi DP problem:
3.74/1.74	The TRS P consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X), s(Y)) -> LESS_IN_GA(X, Y)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The TRS R consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(0, s(X1)) -> less_out_ga(0, s(X1))
3.74/1.74	   less_in_ga(s(X), s(Y)) -> U1_ga(X, Y, less_in_ga(X, Y))
3.74/1.74	   U1_ga(X, Y, less_out_ga(X, Y)) -> less_out_ga(s(X), s(Y))
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
3.74/1.74	less_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_in_ga(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	0  =  0
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	less_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  less_out_ga
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	s(x1)  =  s(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	U1_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_ga(x3)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	LESS_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  LESS_IN_GA(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(7) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT)
3.74/1.74	For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(8)
3.74/1.74	Obligation:
3.74/1.74	Pi DP problem:
3.74/1.74	The TRS P consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X), s(Y)) -> LESS_IN_GA(X, Y)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	R is empty.
3.74/1.74	The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
3.74/1.74	s(x1)  =  s(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	LESS_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  LESS_IN_GA(x1)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(9) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND)
3.74/1.74	Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(10)
3.74/1.74	Obligation:
3.74/1.74	Q DP problem:
3.74/1.74	The TRS P consists of the following rules:
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	   LESS_IN_GA(s(X)) -> LESS_IN_GA(X)
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	R is empty.
3.74/1.74	Q is empty.
3.74/1.74	We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(11) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT)
3.74/1.74	By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. 
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
3.74/1.74	*LESS_IN_GA(s(X)) -> LESS_IN_GA(X)
3.74/1.74	The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	----------------------------------------
3.74/1.74	
3.74/1.74	(12)
3.74/1.74	YES
3.99/1.81	EOF