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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRSToCSRProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (2) CSR (3) CSRRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 29 ms] (4) CSR (5) CSRRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) CSR (7) RisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: active(f(b, X, c)) -> mark(f(X, c, X)) active(c) -> mark(b) active(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(X1, active(X2), X3) f(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3)) proper(b) -> ok(b) proper(c) -> ok(c) f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(f(X1, X2, X3)) top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X)) top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X)) The set Q consists of the following terms: active(c) active(f(x0, x1, x2)) f(x0, mark(x1), x2) proper(f(x0, x1, x2)) proper(b) proper(c) f(ok(x0), ok(x1), ok(x2)) top(mark(x0)) top(ok(x0)) ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRSToCSRProof (SOUND) The following Q TRS is given: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: active(f(b, X, c)) -> mark(f(X, c, X)) active(c) -> mark(b) active(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(X1, active(X2), X3) f(X1, mark(X2), X3) -> mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3)) proper(b) -> ok(b) proper(c) -> ok(c) f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) -> ok(f(X1, X2, X3)) top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X)) top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X)) The set Q consists of the following terms: active(c) active(f(x0, x1, x2)) f(x0, mark(x1), x2) proper(f(x0, x1, x2)) proper(b) proper(c) f(ok(x0), ok(x1), ok(x2)) top(mark(x0)) top(ok(x0)) Special symbols used for the transformation (see [GM04]): top: top_1, active: active_1, mark: mark_1, ok: ok_1, proper: proper_1 The replacement map contains the following entries: f: {2} b: empty set c: empty set The QTRS contained just a subset of rules created by the complete Giesl-Middeldorp transformation. Therefore, the inverse transformation is sound, but not necessarily complete. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Context-sensitive rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X) c -> b The replacement map contains the following entries: f: {2} b: empty set c: empty set ---------------------------------------- (3) CSRRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) The following CSR is given: Context-sensitive rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X) c -> b The replacement map contains the following entries: f: {2} b: empty set c: empty set Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(b) = 1 POL(c) = 2 POL(f(x_1, x_2, x_3)) = 2*x_2 + 2*x_3 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: c -> b ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Context-sensitive rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X) The replacement map contains the following entries: f: {2} b: empty set c: empty set ---------------------------------------- (5) CSRRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) The following CSR is given: Context-sensitive rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X) The replacement map contains the following entries: f: {2} b: empty set c: empty set Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(b) = 1 POL(c) = 0 POL(f(x_1, x_2, x_3)) = x_1 + x_2 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: f(b, X, c) -> f(X, c, X) ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Context-sensitive rewrite system: R is empty. ---------------------------------------- (7) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The CSR R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven. ---------------------------------------- (8) YES