YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination of the given RelTRS could be proven: (0) RelTRS (1) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 48 ms] (2) RelTRS (3) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) RelTRS (5) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) RelTRS (7) RIsEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: a(b(x1)) -> a(x1) d(b(x1)) -> b(x1) d(c(x1)) -> c(x1) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(x1) -> d(a(x1)) c(x1) -> c(b(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (1) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] to (N^2, +, *, >=, >) : <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0], [2]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(d(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 2], [0, 2]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: Rules from R: d(b(x1)) -> b(x1) Rules from S: none ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: a(b(x1)) -> a(x1) d(c(x1)) -> c(x1) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(x1) -> d(a(x1)) c(x1) -> c(b(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (3) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] to (N^2, +, *, >=, >) : <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 1], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0], [1]] + [[1, 0], [0, 1]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(d(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: Rules from R: a(b(x1)) -> a(x1) Rules from S: none ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: d(c(x1)) -> c(x1) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(x1) -> d(a(x1)) c(x1) -> c(b(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (5) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] to (N^2, +, *, >=, >) : <<< POL(d(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 2], [0, 2]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0], [2]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[2, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[1, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: Rules from R: d(c(x1)) -> c(x1) Rules from S: none ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: R is empty. The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(x1) -> d(a(x1)) c(x1) -> c(b(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (7) RIsEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven. ---------------------------------------- (8) YES