/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# AProVE Commit ID: c69e44bd14796315568835c1ffa2502984884775 mhark 20210624 unpublished Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 5 ms] (2) QDP (3) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (4) QDP (5) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 392 ms] (6) QDP (7) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 308 ms] (8) QDP (9) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 626 ms] (10) QDP (11) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (12) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(x1) -> B(c(x1)) A(x1) -> C(x1) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(a(b(x1)))) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(b(x1))) C(c(x1)) -> A(b(x1)) C(c(x1)) -> B(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 2 less nodes. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(x1) -> C(x1) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(a(b(x1)))) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(b(x1))) C(c(x1)) -> A(b(x1)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. C(c(x1)) -> A(b(x1)) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic integers [ARCTIC,STERNAGEL_THIEMANN_RTA14]: <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-I, -1A, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-I, -I, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[0A], [2A], [2A]] + [[-I, 1A, -I], [1A, 1A, 1A], [2A, -1A, 1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[1A], [0A], [2A]] + [[1A, 0A, 0A], [-I, 1A, -I], [-1A, 1A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[0A], [-1A], [-I]] + [[-1A, -1A, -1A], [0A, -I, -I], [0A, -I, -I]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(x1) -> C(x1) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(a(b(x1)))) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(b(x1))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. C(c(x1)) -> A(a(b(x1))) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic integers [ARCTIC,STERNAGEL_THIEMANN_RTA14]: <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[0A, -I, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[-I]] + [[0A, -I, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [0A]] + [[0A, -1A, -1A], [-1A, -I, 1A], [2A, 2A, 1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[-I], [-1A], [-I]] + [[0A, -1A, -1A], [1A, 1A, 0A], [0A, -1A, 1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, -I, -I], [-1A, -1A, -1A], [0A, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(x1) -> C(x1) C(c(x1)) -> A(a(a(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. A(x1) -> C(x1) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO] with arctic integers [ARCTIC,STERNAGEL_THIEMANN_RTA14]: <<< POL(A(x_1)) = [[1A]] + [[-I, 1A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(C(x_1)) = [[0A]] + [[-I, 0A, -I]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(c(x_1)) = [[-I], [1A], [-I]] + [[0A, 2A, -I], [2A, 2A, 2A], [-1A, 2A, -1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(a(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [0A]] + [[0A, 2A, 2A], [-1A, 1A, -I], [1A, 1A, 1A]] * x_1 >>> <<< POL(b(x_1)) = [[-I], [-I], [-I]] + [[0A, -I, 0A], [-1A, -I, -I], [-I, -1A, -1A]] * x_1 >>> The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) ---------------------------------------- (10) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: C(c(x1)) -> A(a(a(b(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(x1) -> b(c(x1)) b(a(b(x1))) -> x1 c(c(x1)) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (11) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (12) TRUE