/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_standard /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MAYBE proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Quasi decreasingness of the given CTRS could not be shown: (0) CTRS (1) CTRSToQTRSProof [SOUND, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) QTRSRRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 44 ms] (4) QTRS (5) Overlay + Local Confluence [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) QTRS (7) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) QDP (9) UsableRulesProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) QDP (11) QReductionProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (12) QDP (13) NonTerminationLoopProof [COMPLETE, 0 ms] (14) NO ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Conditional term rewrite system: The TRS R is empty. The conditional TRS C consists of the following conditional rules: a -> b <= f(a) -> b ---------------------------------------- (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: a -> U1(f(a)) U1(b) -> b Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(U1(x_1)) = 2*x_1 POL(a) = 0 POL(b) = 2 POL(f(x_1)) = x_1 With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly: U1(b) -> b ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a -> U1(f(a)) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (5) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT) The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost. ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a -> U1(f(a)) The set Q consists of the following terms: a ---------------------------------------- (7) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A -> A The TRS R consists of the following rules: a -> U1(f(a)) The set Q consists of the following terms: a We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT) As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R. ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A -> A R is empty. The set Q consists of the following terms: a We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT) We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN]. a ---------------------------------------- (12) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A -> A R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (13) NonTerminationLoopProof (COMPLETE) We used the non-termination processor [FROCOS05] to show that the DP problem is infinite. Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly. s = A evaluates to t =A Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions: * Matcher: [ ] * Semiunifier: [ ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rewriting sequence The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from A to A. ---------------------------------------- (14) NO