YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 113 ms] (2) QTRS (3) Overlay + Local Confluence [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QTRS (5) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) QDP (7) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) QDP (9) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) QDP (11) QReductionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (12) QDP (13) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (14) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: max(L(x)) -> x max(N(L(0), L(y))) -> y max(N(L(s(x)), L(s(y)))) -> s(max(N(L(x), L(y)))) max(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> max(N(L(x), L(max(N(y, z))))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: max/1)YES( L/1)YES( N/2(YES,YES) 0/0) s/1(YES) Quasi precedence: N_2 > s_1 0 > s_1 Status: N_2: multiset status 0: multiset status s_1: multiset status With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: max(N(L(0), L(y))) -> y max(N(L(s(x)), L(s(y)))) -> s(max(N(L(x), L(y)))) ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: max(L(x)) -> x max(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> max(N(L(x), L(max(N(y, z))))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT) The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: max(L(x)) -> x max(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> max(N(L(x), L(max(N(y, z))))) The set Q consists of the following terms: max(L(x0)) max(N(L(x0), N(x1, x2))) ---------------------------------------- (5) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MAX(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> MAX(N(L(x), L(max(N(y, z))))) MAX(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> MAX(N(y, z)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: max(L(x)) -> x max(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> max(N(L(x), L(max(N(y, z))))) The set Q consists of the following terms: max(L(x0)) max(N(L(x0), N(x1, x2))) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MAX(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> MAX(N(y, z)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: max(L(x)) -> x max(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> max(N(L(x), L(max(N(y, z))))) The set Q consists of the following terms: max(L(x0)) max(N(L(x0), N(x1, x2))) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MAX(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> MAX(N(y, z)) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: max(L(x0)) max(N(L(x0), N(x1, x2))) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT) We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN]. max(L(x0)) max(N(L(x0), N(x1, x2))) ---------------------------------------- (12) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: MAX(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> MAX(N(y, z)) R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (13) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT) 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. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs: *MAX(N(L(x), N(y, z))) -> MAX(N(y, z)) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 ---------------------------------------- (14) YES