YES
proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty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, 6 ms]
(2) QDP
(3) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 89 ms]
(4) QDP
(5) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 85 ms]
(6) QDP
(7) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(8) TRUE


----------------------------------------

(0)
Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(b(x1))))
   b(a(b(x1))) -> a(b(a(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:

   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> B(a(a(b(x1))))
   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> A(a(b(x1)))
   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1))
   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> B(x1)
   B(a(b(x1))) -> A(b(a(x1)))
   B(a(b(x1))) -> B(a(x1))
   B(a(b(x1))) -> A(x1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(b(x1))))
   b(a(b(x1))) -> a(b(a(x1)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(3) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> A(a(b(x1)))
   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1))
   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> B(x1)
   B(a(b(x1))) -> B(a(x1))
   B(a(b(x1))) -> A(x1)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering:  Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation:

POL( A_1(x_1) ) = max{0, x_1 - 1}
POL( B_1(x_1) ) = max{0, x_1 - 1}
POL( b_1(x_1) ) = 2x_1 + 1
POL( a_1(x_1) ) = 2x_1 + 1

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:

   b(a(b(x1))) -> a(b(a(x1)))
   a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(b(x1))))


----------------------------------------

(4)
Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> B(a(a(b(x1))))
   B(a(b(x1))) -> A(b(a(x1)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(b(x1))))
   b(a(b(x1))) -> a(b(a(x1)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

   B(a(b(x1))) -> A(b(a(x1)))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering:  Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]:

   <<<
 POL(A(x_1)) =  	[[0A]] 	 +  	[[-I, 0A, -I]] 	* 	x_1
>>>

   <<<
 POL(a(x_1)) =  	[[0A], [0A], [-I]] 	 +  	[[-I, 0A, 0A], [0A, 1A, 1A], [0A, -I, -I]] 	* 	x_1
>>>

   <<<
 POL(B(x_1)) =  	[[-I]] 	 +  	[[0A, 0A, 1A]] 	* 	x_1
>>>

   <<<
 POL(b(x_1)) =  	[[0A], [0A], [0A]] 	 +  	[[1A, 0A, 0A], [-I, -I, 1A], [0A, -I, 1A]] 	* 	x_1
>>>


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:

   b(a(b(x1))) -> a(b(a(x1)))
   a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(b(x1))))


----------------------------------------

(6)
Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

   A(a(a(a(x1)))) -> B(a(a(b(x1))))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(b(x1))))
   b(a(b(x1))) -> a(b(a(x1)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
----------------------------------------

(7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.
----------------------------------------

(8)
TRUE