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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 40 ms] (2) QTRS (3) Overlay + Local Confluence [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QTRS (5) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) QDP (7) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) QDP (9) QReductionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) QDP (11) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (12) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) c(b(x1)) -> a(a(a(x1))) a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(c(x1)) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(a(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 7 + x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: c(b(x1)) -> a(a(a(x1))) a(a(a(a(x1)))) -> b(c(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT) The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) The set Q consists of the following terms: b(c(x0)) ---------------------------------------- (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(c(x1)) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) The set Q consists of the following terms: b(c(x0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(c(x1)) -> B(x1) R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: b(c(x0)) We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT) We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN]. b(c(x0)) ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(c(x1)) -> B(x1) R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) 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(c(x1)) -> B(x1) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 ---------------------------------------- (12) YES