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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 52 ms] (2) QTRS (3) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 1 ms] (4) QTRS (5) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 3 ms] (6) QDP (7) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 2 ms] (8) AND (9) QDP (10) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (11) QDP (12) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (13) YES (14) QDP (15) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 24 ms] (16) QDP (17) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 272 ms] (18) QDP (19) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: C(x1) -> c(x1) c(c(x1)) -> x1 b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> x1 c(C(x1)) -> x1 C(c(x1)) -> x1 Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(C(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: C(x1) -> c(x1) c(C(x1)) -> x1 C(c(x1)) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: c(c(x1)) -> x1 b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> x1 Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: c(c(x1)) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> x1 Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (5) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B^1(b(x1)) -> B^2(x1) B^2(B(x1)) -> B^1(x1) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B^2(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(c(B(c(b(x1)))))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B^1(c(B(c(b(x1))))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(B(c(b(x1)))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B^2(c(b(x1))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(x1)) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B^1(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> 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 2 SCCs with 4 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (8) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (9) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B^2(B(x1)) -> B^1(x1) B^1(b(x1)) -> B^2(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (10) 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. ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B^2(B(x1)) -> B^1(x1) B^1(b(x1)) -> B^2(x1) R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (12) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs: *B^1(b(x1)) -> B^2(x1) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 *B^2(B(x1)) -> B^1(x1) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 ---------------------------------------- (13) YES ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(B(c(b(x1)))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(c(B(c(b(x1)))))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(x1)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> 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(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(B(c(b(x1)))) C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(x1)) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation: POL( C_1(x_1) ) = max{0, x_1 - 2} POL( B_1(x_1) ) = x_1 POL( b_1(x_1) ) = x_1 POL( c_1(x_1) ) = 2x_1 + 2 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) b(B(x1)) -> x1 c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) B(b(x1)) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (16) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(c(B(c(b(x1)))))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (17) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. C(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> C(b(c(B(c(b(x1)))))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]: <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[0A, 1A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [0A]] + [[-I, 0A, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, 1A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0A], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, -I, -I], [-I, 0A, -I], [-I, -I, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [0A]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, -I, -I], [1A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) b(B(x1)) -> x1 c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) B(b(x1)) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (18) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(x1)) -> B(x1) B(B(x1)) -> b(x1) c(B(c(b(c(x1))))) -> B(c(b(c(B(c(b(x1))))))) b(B(x1)) -> x1 B(b(x1)) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (19) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (20) YES