YES
proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.c
# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty


Termination of the given C Problem could be proven:

(0) C Problem
(1) CToIRSProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(2) IntTRS
(3) TerminationGraphProcessor [SOUND, 42 ms]
(4) IntTRS
(5) IntTRSCompressionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(6) IntTRS
(7) IntTRSUnneededArgumentFilterProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(8) IntTRS
(9) PolynomialOrderProcessor [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms]
(10) YES


----------------------------------------

(0)
Obligation:
c file /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.c
----------------------------------------

(1) CToIRSProof (EQUIVALENT)
Parsed C Integer Program as IRS.
----------------------------------------

(2)
Obligation:
Rules:
f1(x, y, t) -> f2(x_1, y, t) :|: TRUE
f2(x1, x2, x3) -> f3(x1, x4, x3) :|: TRUE
f4(x5, x6, x7) -> f5(x5, x6, x5) :|: TRUE
f5(x8, x9, x10) -> f6(x9, x9, x10) :|: TRUE
f6(x11, x12, x13) -> f7(x11, x13, x13) :|: TRUE
f3(x14, x15, x16) -> f4(x14, x15, x16) :|: x14 > x15
f7(x17, x18, x19) -> f3(x17, x18, x19) :|: TRUE
f3(x20, x21, x22) -> f8(x20, x21, x22) :|: x20 <= x21
Start term: f1(x, y, t)

----------------------------------------

(3) TerminationGraphProcessor (SOUND)
Constructed the termination graph and obtained one non-trivial SCC.

----------------------------------------

(4)
Obligation:
Rules:
f3(x14, x15, x16) -> f4(x14, x15, x16) :|: x14 > x15
f7(x17, x18, x19) -> f3(x17, x18, x19) :|: TRUE
f6(x11, x12, x13) -> f7(x11, x13, x13) :|: TRUE
f5(x8, x9, x10) -> f6(x9, x9, x10) :|: TRUE
f4(x5, x6, x7) -> f5(x5, x6, x5) :|: TRUE

----------------------------------------

(5) IntTRSCompressionProof (EQUIVALENT)
Compressed rules.
----------------------------------------

(6)
Obligation:
Rules:
f5(x8:0, x9:0, x10:0) -> f5(x9:0, x10:0, x9:0) :|: x9:0 > x10:0

----------------------------------------

(7) IntTRSUnneededArgumentFilterProof (EQUIVALENT)
Some arguments are removed because they cannot influence termination. We removed arguments according to the following replacements:

   f5(x1, x2, x3) -> f5(x2, x3)

----------------------------------------

(8)
Obligation:
Rules:
f5(x9:0, x10:0) -> f5(x10:0, x9:0) :|: x9:0 > x10:0

----------------------------------------

(9) PolynomialOrderProcessor (EQUIVALENT)
Found the following polynomial interpretation:
[f5(x, x1)] = -1 + x - x1

The following rules are decreasing:
f5(x9:0, x10:0) -> f5(x10:0, x9:0) :|: x9:0 > x10:0
The following rules are bounded:
f5(x9:0, x10:0) -> f5(x10:0, x9:0) :|: x9:0 > x10:0

----------------------------------------

(10)
YES