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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 21 ms] (4) QTRS (5) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 12 ms] (6) QDP (7) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) QDP (9) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 35 ms] (10) QDP (11) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 88 ms] (12) QDP (13) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (14) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> a(f(x1)) b(b(x1)) -> c(c(c(x1))) c(c(x1)) -> d(d(d(x1))) c(d(d(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> f(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: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) b(b(x1)) -> c(c(c(x1))) c(c(x1)) -> d(d(d(x1))) d(d(c(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(x1)) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(a(x_1)) = 39 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 26 + x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 17 + x_1 POL(d(x_1)) = 11 + x_1 POL(f(x_1)) = 39 + x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: b(b(x1)) -> c(c(c(x1))) c(c(x1)) -> d(d(d(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) d(d(c(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(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: A(a(x1)) -> B(b(b(x1))) A(a(x1)) -> B(b(x1)) A(a(x1)) -> B(x1) A(x1) -> D(c(d(x1))) A(x1) -> D(x1) B(b(b(x1))) -> F(a(x1)) B(b(b(x1))) -> A(x1) D(d(c(x1))) -> F(x1) F(f(x1)) -> A(f(x1)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) d(d(c(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(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 1 SCC with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(b(x1))) -> F(a(x1)) F(f(x1)) -> A(f(x1)) A(a(x1)) -> B(b(b(x1))) B(b(b(x1))) -> A(x1) A(a(x1)) -> B(b(x1)) A(a(x1)) -> B(x1) A(x1) -> D(x1) D(d(c(x1))) -> F(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) d(d(c(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(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: B(b(b(x1))) -> A(x1) A(a(x1)) -> B(b(x1)) A(a(x1)) -> B(x1) A(x1) -> D(x1) D(d(c(x1))) -> F(x1) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(D(x_1)) = x_1 POL(F(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 3 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 3 + x_1 POL(d(x_1)) = x_1 POL(f(x_1)) = 3 + x_1 ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(b(x1))) -> F(a(x1)) F(f(x1)) -> A(f(x1)) A(a(x1)) -> B(b(b(x1))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) d(d(c(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(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(b(x1))) -> F(a(x1)) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]: <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[1A]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [-I], [0A]] + [[-I, 1A, 0A], [0A, 0A, -I], [0A, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(F(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-I, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[1A], [-I], [0A]] + [[1A, 1A, 0A], [0A, 0A, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(f(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [0A]] + [[-I, 1A, 0A], [-I, 1A, 0A], [-I, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[0A, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(d(x_1)) = [[0A], [-I], [0A]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A], [-I, -I, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [-I]] + [[-I, -I, -I], [-I, -I, -I], [-I, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(x1)) a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (12) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: F(f(x1)) -> A(f(x1)) A(a(x1)) -> B(b(b(x1))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(a(x1)) -> b(b(b(x1))) a(x1) -> d(c(d(x1))) b(b(b(x1))) -> f(a(x1)) d(d(c(x1))) -> f(x1) f(f(x1)) -> a(f(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 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (14) TRUE