/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 11 ms] (4) QDP (5) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) AND (7) QDP (8) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (9) QDP (10) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 20 ms] (11) QDP (12) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (13) TRUE (14) QDP (15) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 212 ms] (16) QDP (17) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 242 ms] (18) QDP (19) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (20) QDP (21) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (22) QDP (23) QDPSizeChangeProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (24) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(a(x1)) -> a(a(d(x1))) a(c(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) d(a(b(x1))) -> b(d(d(c(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) b(a(c(a(x1)))) -> 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(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> 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(x1)) -> D(a(a(x1))) A(b(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) A(b(x1)) -> A(x1) C(a(x1)) -> B(b(x1)) C(a(x1)) -> B(x1) B(a(d(x1))) -> C(d(d(b(x1)))) B(a(d(x1))) -> D(d(b(x1))) B(a(d(x1))) -> D(b(x1)) B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) D(x1) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (6) Complex Obligation (AND) ---------------------------------------- (7) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: D(x1) -> A(x1) A(b(x1)) -> D(a(a(x1))) A(b(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) A(b(x1)) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (9) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: D(x1) -> A(x1) A(b(x1)) -> D(a(a(x1))) A(b(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) A(b(x1)) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: d(x1) -> a(x1) a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (10) 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: A(b(x1)) -> D(a(a(x1))) A(b(x1)) -> A(a(x1)) A(b(x1)) -> A(x1) Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 3*x_1 POL(D(x_1)) = 3*x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 2 + 3*x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 3 + 3*x_1 POL(d(x_1)) = x_1 ---------------------------------------- (11) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: D(x1) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: d(x1) -> a(x1) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (12) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (13) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (14) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(a(d(x1))) -> C(d(d(b(x1)))) C(a(x1)) -> B(b(x1)) B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) C(a(x1)) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (15) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. C(a(x1)) -> B(b(x1)) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic natural numbers [ARCTIC]: <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-I, -I, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0A], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, -I, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(d(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [1A]] + [[0A, 0A, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[1A]] + [[-I, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [1A], [0A]] + [[0A, 0A, 0A], [0A, 0A, 0A], [-I, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[1A], [1A], [0A]] + [[-I, -I, 0A], [0A, -I, 0A], [-I, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (16) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(a(d(x1))) -> C(d(d(b(x1)))) B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) C(a(x1)) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (17) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. C(a(x1)) -> B(x1) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic integers [ARCTIC,STERNAGEL_THIEMANN_RTA14]: <<< POL(B(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-1A, -1A, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0A], [0A], [-1A]] + [[-I, 1A, -1A], [-I, -1A, -1A], [-1A, -1A, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(d(x_1)) = [[0A], [1A], [-1A]] + [[-I, 1A, -1A], [-1A, -1A, -1A], [-1A, -1A, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[1A]] + [[-1A, -1A, 1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [-1A], [2A]] + [[-1A, -1A, -I], [-I, -I, -I], [0A, 0A, 0A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[1A], [-1A], [2A]] + [[-1A, -1A, -1A], [-I, -I, -I], [-1A, -1A, 2A]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 ---------------------------------------- (18) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(a(d(x1))) -> C(d(d(b(x1)))) B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (19) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (20) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(b(x1)) -> d(a(a(x1))) c(a(x1)) -> b(b(x1)) b(a(d(x1))) -> c(d(d(b(x1)))) d(x1) -> a(x1) a(c(a(b(x1)))) -> x1 Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (21) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (22) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (23) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs: *B(a(d(x1))) -> B(x1) The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1 ---------------------------------------- (24) YES