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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 10 ms] (2) QDP (3) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 154 ms] (4) QDP (5) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 82 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(x1) -> x1 a(b(b(x1))) -> b(b(b(c(x1)))) b(c(x1)) -> a(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(b(b(x1))) -> B(b(b(c(x1)))) A(b(b(x1))) -> B(b(c(x1))) A(b(b(x1))) -> B(c(x1)) B(c(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) B(c(x1)) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> x1 a(b(b(x1))) -> b(b(b(c(x1)))) b(c(x1)) -> a(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(b(b(x1))) -> B(b(c(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, -I, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [-I]] + [[-I, 0A, 0A], [0A, -I, 0A], [0A, 1A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[0A, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0A], [-I], [0A]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A], [-I, -I, -I], [0A, -I, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [0A]] + [[0A, -I, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, -I, 0A]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: a(b(b(x1))) -> b(b(b(c(x1)))) b(c(x1)) -> a(a(x1)) a(x1) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(b(b(x1))) -> B(b(b(c(x1)))) A(b(b(x1))) -> B(c(x1)) B(c(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) B(c(x1)) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> x1 a(b(b(x1))) -> b(b(b(c(x1)))) b(c(x1)) -> a(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. A(b(b(x1))) -> B(b(b(c(x1)))) A(b(b(x1))) -> B(c(x1)) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]: <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[1A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, 0A, -I], [1A, 0A, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, -I, -I], [0A, -I, -I], [1A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, -I, -I], [1A, 0A, 0A], [-I, -I, 0A]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: a(b(b(x1))) -> b(b(b(c(x1)))) b(c(x1)) -> a(a(x1)) a(x1) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(c(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) B(c(x1)) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> x1 a(b(b(x1))) -> b(b(b(c(x1)))) b(c(x1)) -> a(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 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (8) TRUE