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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QDP (5) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) AND (7) QDP (8) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 8 ms] (9) QDP (10) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 17 ms] (11) QDP (12) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (13) AND (14) QDP (15) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 6 ms] (16) QDP (17) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (18) YES (19) QDP (20) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 20 ms] (21) QDP (22) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (23) YES (24) QDP (25) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 2 ms] (26) QDP (27) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 11 ms] (28) QDP (29) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (30) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(s(x1)) -> s(a(x1)) b(a(b(s(x1)))) -> a(b(s(a(x1)))) b(a(b(b(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) a(b(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(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: s(a(x1)) -> a(s(x1)) s(b(a(b(x1)))) -> a(s(b(a(x1)))) b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(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: S(a(x1)) -> A(s(x1)) S(a(x1)) -> S(x1) S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(s(b(a(x1)))) S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> S(b(a(x1))) S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(b(a(x1))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1)) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: s(a(x1)) -> a(s(x1)) s(b(a(b(x1)))) -> a(s(b(a(x1)))) b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 4 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (6) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(b(a(x1))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1)) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: s(a(x1)) -> a(s(x1)) s(b(a(b(x1)))) -> a(s(b(a(x1)))) b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (8) 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. ---------------------------------------- (9) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(b(a(x1))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1)) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (10) 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: B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(b(a(x1))) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1)) A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(x1) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 1 + 2*x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = 2 + 2*x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (12) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs. ---------------------------------------- (13) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(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. B(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 0 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (16) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (17) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (18) YES ---------------------------------------- (19) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (20) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. A(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 4*x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 1 POL(b(x_1)) = 0 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (21) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (22) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (23) YES ---------------------------------------- (24) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> S(b(a(x1))) S(a(x1)) -> S(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: s(a(x1)) -> a(s(x1)) s(b(a(b(x1)))) -> a(s(b(a(x1)))) b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (25) 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. ---------------------------------------- (26) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> S(b(a(x1))) S(a(x1)) -> S(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (27) 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: S(b(a(b(x1)))) -> S(b(a(x1))) S(a(x1)) -> S(x1) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(S(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 ---------------------------------------- (28) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) b(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (29) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (30) YES