/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination of the given RelTRS could be proven: (0) RelTRS (1) RelTRS S Cleaner [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) RelTRS (3) RelTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) RelTRS (5) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 169 ms] (6) RelTRS (7) RelTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 3 ms] (8) RelTRS (9) RIsEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: c(a(b(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(c(a(x1))) -> b(a(a(x1))) a(a(a(x1))) -> a(a(a(x1))) a(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) b(a(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) b(a(c(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (1) RelTRS S Cleaner (EQUIVALENT) We have deleted all rules from S that have the shape t -> t: a(a(a(x1))) -> a(a(a(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: c(a(b(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(c(a(x1))) -> b(a(a(x1))) a(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) b(a(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) b(a(c(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (3) RelTRS Reverse (EQUIVALENT) We have reversed the following relative TRS [REVERSE]: The set of rules R is c(a(b(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) The set of rules S is a(c(a(x1))) -> b(a(a(x1))) a(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(a(x1))) b(a(c(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) b(a(c(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) We have obtained the following relative TRS: The set of rules R is b(a(c(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) The set of rules S is a(c(a(x1))) -> a(a(b(x1))) b(a(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: b(a(c(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: a(c(a(x1))) -> a(a(b(x1))) b(a(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (5) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] to (N^2, +, *, >=, >) : <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[2, 0], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[0], [0]] + [[2, 1], [0, 0]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0], [1]] + [[2, 0], [0, 2]] * x_1 >>> With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: Rules from R: b(a(c(x1))) -> a(c(a(x1))) Rules from S: a(c(a(x1))) -> a(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: The relative TRS consists of the following R rules: c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: b(a(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (7) RelTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) We used the following monotonic ordering for rule removal: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(a(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed [MATRO] because they are oriented strictly: Rules from R: c(c(c(x1))) -> b(b(b(x1))) Rules from S: c(a(b(x1))) -> b(a(b(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Relative term rewrite system: R is empty. The relative TRS consists of the following S rules: b(a(a(x1))) -> a(b(c(x1))) c(a(b(x1))) -> c(b(c(x1))) ---------------------------------------- (9) RIsEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven. ---------------------------------------- (10) YES