/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/starexec_run_default /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES ** BEGIN proof argument ** All the DP problems were proved finite. As all the involved DP processors are sound, the TRS under analysis terminates. ** END proof argument ** ** BEGIN proof description ** ## Searching for a generalized rewrite rule (a rule whose right-hand side contains a variable that does not occur in the left-hand side)... No generalized rewrite rule found! ## Applying the DP framework... ## 4 initial DP problems to solve. ## First, we try to decompose these problems into smaller problems. ## Round 1 [4 DP problems]: ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [f^#(s(_0),s(_1),0) -> f^#(_0,_1,s(0)), f^#(s(_0),0,s(_1)) -> f^#(_0,s(0),_1), f^#(s(_0),s(_1),s(_2)) -> f^#(_0,_1,f(s(_0),s(_1),_2)), f^#(s(_0),s(_1),s(_2)) -> f^#(s(_0),s(_1),_2)] TRS = {f(_0,0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,_0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,0,_0) -> s(_0), f(s(0),_0,_1) -> f(0,s(_0),s(_1)), f(s(_0),s(_1),0) -> f(_0,_1,s(0)), f(s(_0),0,s(_1)) -> f(_0,s(0),_1), f(0,s(0),s(0)) -> s(s(0)), f(s(_0),s(_1),s(_2)) -> f(_0,_1,f(s(_0),s(_1),_2)), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(0)) -> f(0,_0,s(0)), f(0,s(0),s(s(_0))) -> f(0,s(0),_0), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(s(_1))) -> f(0,_0,f(0,s(s(_0)),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Failed! ## Trying with polynomial interpretations... Failed! ## Trying with lexicographic path orders... The constraints are satisfied by the lexicographic path order using the argument filtering: {s:[0], f:[0, 1, 2], f^#:[0, 1, 2]} and the precedence: f^# > [s, 0, f], s > [0], f > [s, 0] This DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [f^#(0,s(s(_0)),s(s(_1))) -> f^#(0,_0,f(0,s(s(_0)),s(_1))), f^#(0,s(s(_0)),s(s(_1))) -> f^#(0,s(s(_0)),s(_1))] TRS = {f(_0,0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,_0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,0,_0) -> s(_0), f(s(0),_0,_1) -> f(0,s(_0),s(_1)), f(s(_0),s(_1),0) -> f(_0,_1,s(0)), f(s(_0),0,s(_1)) -> f(_0,s(0),_1), f(0,s(0),s(0)) -> s(s(0)), f(s(_0),s(_1),s(_2)) -> f(_0,_1,f(s(_0),s(_1),_2)), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(0)) -> f(0,_0,s(0)), f(0,s(0),s(s(_0))) -> f(0,s(0),_0), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(s(_1))) -> f(0,_0,f(0,s(s(_0)),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Failed! ## Trying with polynomial interpretations... Failed! ## Trying with lexicographic path orders... The constraints are satisfied by the lexicographic path order using the argument filtering: {s:[0], f:[0, 1, 2], f^#:[0, 1, 2]} and the precedence: f^# > [s, 0, f], s > [0], f > [s, 0] This DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [f^#(0,s(0),s(s(_0))) -> f^#(0,s(0),_0)] TRS = {f(_0,0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,_0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,0,_0) -> s(_0), f(s(0),_0,_1) -> f(0,s(_0),s(_1)), f(s(_0),s(_1),0) -> f(_0,_1,s(0)), f(s(_0),0,s(_1)) -> f(_0,s(0),_1), f(0,s(0),s(0)) -> s(s(0)), f(s(_0),s(_1),s(_2)) -> f(_0,_1,f(s(_0),s(_1),_2)), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(0)) -> f(0,_0,s(0)), f(0,s(0),s(s(_0))) -> f(0,s(0),_0), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(s(_1))) -> f(0,_0,f(0,s(s(_0)),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Success! This DP problem is finite. ## DP problem: Dependency pairs = [f^#(0,s(s(_0)),s(0)) -> f^#(0,_0,s(0))] TRS = {f(_0,0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,_0,0) -> s(_0), f(0,0,_0) -> s(_0), f(s(0),_0,_1) -> f(0,s(_0),s(_1)), f(s(_0),s(_1),0) -> f(_0,_1,s(0)), f(s(_0),0,s(_1)) -> f(_0,s(0),_1), f(0,s(0),s(0)) -> s(s(0)), f(s(_0),s(_1),s(_2)) -> f(_0,_1,f(s(_0),s(_1),_2)), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(0)) -> f(0,_0,s(0)), f(0,s(0),s(s(_0))) -> f(0,s(0),_0), f(0,s(s(_0)),s(s(_1))) -> f(0,_0,f(0,s(s(_0)),s(_1)))} ## Trying with homeomorphic embeddings... Success! This DP problem is finite. ## All the DP problems were proved finite. As all the involved DP processors are sound, the TRS under analysis terminates. Proof run on Linux version 3.10.0-1160.25.1.el7.x86_64 for amd64 using Java version 1.8.0_292 ** END proof description ** Total number of generated unfolded rules = 0