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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 19 ms] (4) QDP (5) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 98 ms] (6) QDP (7) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 30 ms] (8) QDP (9) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 48 ms] (10) QDP (11) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 47 ms] (12) QDP (13) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (14) QDP (15) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 230 ms] (16) QDP (17) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (18) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: c(b(a(a(x1)))) -> a(a(b(c(x1)))) b(a(a(a(x1)))) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) a(b(c(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) c(c(b(b(x1)))) -> b(b(c(c(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRS Reverse (EQUIVALENT) We applied the QTRS Reverse Processor [REVERSE]. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(a(x1))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) C(b(a(x1))) -> B(c(x1)) C(b(a(x1))) -> C(x1) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(c(b(b(x1)))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(b(b(x1))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> B(b(x1)) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(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(a(b(c(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) C(b(a(x1))) -> B(c(x1)) C(b(a(x1))) -> C(x1) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(C(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = x_1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(a(x1))) C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(c(b(b(x1)))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(b(b(x1))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> B(b(x1)) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(b(b(x1))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> B(b(x1)) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> B(x1) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(C(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(a(x1))) C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(c(b(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) 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: A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(a(x1))) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = 2 + 2*x_1 POL(C(x_1)) = 2 + 2*x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 2 + 2*x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 2 + 2*x_1 ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(c(b(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. B(b(c(c(x1)))) -> C(c(b(b(x1)))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation: POL( A_1(x_1) ) = 2 POL( B_1(x_1) ) = x_1 + 1 POL( C_1(x_1) ) = 2 POL( c_1(x_1) ) = x_1 + 1 POL( b_1(x_1) ) = max{0, 2x_1 - 2} POL( a_1(x_1) ) = 1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (12) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (13) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(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. C(b(a(x1))) -> A(b(c(x1))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]: <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[1A]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [0A]] + [[0A, -I, 0A], [0A, -I, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [0A]] + [[0A, 0A, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[0A, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0A], [1A], [0A]] + [[-I, -I, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A], [-I, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (16) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(c(x1)))) -> C(b(a(a(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(c(x1)))) -> c(b(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) c(b(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) b(b(c(c(x1)))) -> c(c(b(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (17) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (18) TRUE