YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination of the given ETRS could be proven: (0) ETRS (1) RRRPoloETRSProof [EQUIVALENT, 344 ms] (2) ETRS (3) RRRPoloETRSProof [EQUIVALENT, 160 ms] (4) ETRS (5) RRRPoloETRSProof [EQUIVALENT, 238 ms] (6) ETRS (7) EquationalDependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) EDP (9) EDependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l app(cons(x, l), k) -> cons(x, app(l, k)) sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x, y), l)) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) plus(0, y) -> y plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y)) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) ---------------------------------------- (1) RRRPoloETRSProof (EQUIVALENT) The following E TRS is given: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l app(cons(x, l), k) -> cons(x, app(l, k)) sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x, y), l)) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) plus(0, y) -> y plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y)) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) The following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly by a polynomial ordering: app(cons(x, l), k) -> cons(x, app(l, k)) plus(0, y) -> y plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y)) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(0) = 0 POL(app(x_1, x_2)) = 2*x_1 + 2*x_1*x_2 + x_2 POL(cons(x_1, x_2)) = 1 + x_1 + x_1*x_2 + 2*x_2 POL(nil) = 0 POL(plus(x_1, x_2)) = 2 + 2*x_1 + x_1*x_2 + 2*x_2 POL(s(x_1)) = 3 + 2*x_1 POL(sum(x_1)) = x_1 ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x, y), l)) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) ---------------------------------------- (3) RRRPoloETRSProof (EQUIVALENT) The following E TRS is given: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x, y), l)) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) The following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly by a polynomial ordering: sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x, y), l)) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(app(x_1, x_2)) = x_1 + x_2 POL(cons(x_1, x_2)) = 3 + x_1 + 3*x_2 POL(nil) = 0 POL(plus(x_1, x_2)) = x_1 + x_2 POL(sum(x_1)) = x_1 ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) ---------------------------------------- (5) RRRPoloETRSProof (EQUIVALENT) The following E TRS is given: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) The following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly by a polynomial ordering: app(nil, k) -> k app(l, nil) -> l Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(app(x_1, x_2)) = 2 + x_1 + x_2 POL(cons(x_1, x_2)) = 2*x_1 + 2*x_2 POL(nil) = 0 POL(plus(x_1, x_2)) = 3 + 3*x_1 + 2*x_1*x_2 + 3*x_2 POL(sum(x_1)) = x_1 ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Equational rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) ---------------------------------------- (7) EquationalDependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,DA_STEIN] we result in the following initial EDP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: SUM(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> SUM(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) SUM(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> SUM(cons(x, cons(y, k))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) E# is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,E#,R,E)-chains ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: The TRS P consists of the following rules: SUM(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> SUM(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) SUM(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> SUM(cons(x, cons(y, k))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: sum(cons(x, nil)) -> cons(x, nil) sum(app(l, cons(x, cons(y, k)))) -> sum(app(l, sum(cons(x, cons(y, k))))) The set E consists of the following equations: plus(x, y) == plus(y, x) plus(plus(x, y), z) == plus(x, plus(y, z)) E# is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,E#,R,E)-chains ---------------------------------------- (9) EDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Equational Dependency Graph [DA_STEIN] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (10) TRUE