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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 35 ms] (2) QDP (3) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) AND (5) QDP (6) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (7) QDP (8) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 73 ms] (9) QDP (10) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (11) YES (12) QDP (13) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (14) QDP (15) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 28 ms] (16) QDP (17) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (18) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) L(2(1(x1))) -> L(1(0(2(x1)))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) L(2(0(x1))) -> L(1(0(1(x1)))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: 1^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 1^1(0(2(x1))) 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) L^1(2(1(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(2(x1)))) L^1(2(1(x1))) -> 1^1(0(2(x1))) L^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) 1^1(2(R(x1))) -> 0^1(1(R(x1))) 1^1(2(R(x1))) -> 1^1(R(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(0(1(x1))) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) L^1(2(0(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(1(x1)))) L^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(0(1(x1))) L^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) L^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) 0^1(2(R(x1))) -> 1^1(0(1(R(x1)))) 0^1(2(R(x1))) -> 0^1(1(R(x1))) 0^1(2(R(x1))) -> 1^1(R(x1)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) L(2(1(x1))) -> L(1(0(2(x1)))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) L(2(0(x1))) -> L(1(0(1(x1)))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 10 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (4) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (5) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 1^1(0(2(x1))) 1^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(0(1(x1))) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) L(2(1(x1))) -> L(1(0(2(x1)))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) L(2(0(x1))) -> L(1(0(1(x1)))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (6) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 1^1(0(2(x1))) 1^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(0(1(x1))) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (8) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented. Strictly oriented dependency pairs: 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 1^1(0(2(x1))) 1^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(1(x1))) -> 0^1(2(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(0(1(x1))) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 0^1(1(x1)) 0^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) 1^1(2(0(x1))) -> 1^1(x1) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(0(x_1)) = x_1 POL(0^1(x_1)) = 2 + 2*x_1 POL(1(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(1^1(x_1)) = 1 + 2*x_1 POL(2(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 POL(R(x_1)) = x_1 ---------------------------------------- (9) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (10) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (11) YES ---------------------------------------- (12) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: L^1(2(0(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(1(x1)))) L^1(2(1(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(2(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) L(2(1(x1))) -> L(1(0(2(x1)))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) L(2(0(x1))) -> L(1(0(1(x1)))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (13) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: L^1(2(0(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(1(x1)))) L^1(2(1(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(2(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (15) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. L^1(2(0(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(1(x1)))) L^1(2(1(x1))) -> L^1(1(0(2(x1)))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(0(x_1)) = 0 POL(1(x_1)) = x_1 POL(2(x_1)) = 1 POL(L^1(x_1)) = x_1 POL(R(x_1)) = x_1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (16) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: 0(2(1(x1))) -> 1(0(2(x1))) 0(2(0(x1))) -> 1(0(1(x1))) 0(2(R(x1))) -> 1(0(1(R(x1)))) 1(2(1(x1))) -> 2(0(2(x1))) 1(2(0(x1))) -> 2(0(1(x1))) 1(2(R(x1))) -> 2(0(1(R(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (17) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (18) YES