/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 40 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 6 ms] (4) QDP (5) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 33 ms] (6) QDP (7) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) QDP (9) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 65 ms] (10) QDP (11) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (12) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) b(a(b(b(x1)))) -> a(b(a(a(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(a(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: b(a(b(b(x1)))) -> a(b(a(a(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) b(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: A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1)) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(x1)) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(x1) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) 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(a(b(a(x1)))) -> B(a(b(x1))) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. A(b(a(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]: <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[1A], [-I], [-I]] + [[-I, 0A, 1A], [-I, 0A, -I], [-I, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [-I]] + [[-I, -I, 0A], [0A, -I, -I], [-I, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-I, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(a(b(a(x1)))) -> A(b(a(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(a(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) b(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (12) TRUE