/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# AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Quasi decreasingness of the given CTRS could be proven: (0) CTRS (1) CTRSToQTRSProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 29 ms] (4) QTRS (5) RisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Conditional term rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a -> c a -> d b -> c b -> d s(k) -> t(a) s(l) -> t(a) g(x, x) -> h(x, x) The conditional TRS C consists of the following conditional rules: f(x, y) -> y <= s(x) -> t(y) ---------------------------------------- (1) CTRSToQTRSProof (SOUND) The conditional rules have been transormed into unconditional rules according to [CTRS,AAECCNOC]. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: f(x, y) -> U1(s(x), y) U1(t(y), y) -> y a -> c a -> d b -> c b -> d s(k) -> t(a) s(l) -> t(a) g(x, x) -> h(x, x) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:g_2 > f_2 > U1_2 > h_2 > l > k > b > a > d > c > s_1 > t_1 and weight map: a=2 c=2 d=2 b=2 k=1 l=1 s_1=2 t_1=1 f_2=2 U1_2=0 g_2=0 h_2=0 The variable weight is 1With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: f(x, y) -> U1(s(x), y) U1(t(y), y) -> y a -> c a -> d b -> c b -> d s(k) -> t(a) s(l) -> t(a) g(x, x) -> h(x, x) ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: R is empty. Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (5) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven. ---------------------------------------- (6) YES