/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# AProVE Commit ID: c69e44bd14796315568835c1ffa2502984884775 mhark 20210624 unpublished Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) QTRS Reverse [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QTRS (3) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 8 ms] (4) QDP (5) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 109 ms] (6) QDP (7) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 22 ms] (8) QDP (9) PisEmptyProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (10) YES ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(b(b(x1)))) -> a(a(b(b(x1)))) a(a(b(a(x1)))) -> a(a(a(b(x1)))) b(a(a(a(x1)))) -> a(b(a(b(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) QTRS Reverse (EQUIVALENT) We applied the QTRS Reverse Processor [REVERSE]. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(b(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) a(b(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(b(a(a(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) A(b(a(a(x1)))) -> A(a(a(x1))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(b(a(x1))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(b(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) a(b(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented. Strictly oriented dependency pairs: B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> B(a(a(x1))) B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> A(a(x1)) B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) A(b(a(a(x1)))) -> B(a(a(a(x1)))) A(b(a(a(x1)))) -> A(a(a(x1))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(b(a(x1)))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(b(a(x1))) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> B(a(x1)) A(a(a(b(x1)))) -> A(x1) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: b(b(b(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) a(b(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented. Strictly oriented dependency pairs: B(b(b(b(x1)))) -> B(b(a(a(x1)))) Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R: b(b(b(b(x1)))) -> b(b(a(a(x1)))) a(b(a(a(x1)))) -> b(a(a(a(x1)))) a(a(a(b(x1)))) -> b(a(b(a(x1)))) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(B(x_1)) = 2*x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 2*x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 + 2*x_1 ---------------------------------------- (8) Obligation: Q DP problem: P is empty. R is empty. Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (9) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT) The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain. ---------------------------------------- (10) YES