Certification Problem

Input (TPDB SRS_Relative/Waldmann_19/random-164)

The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.

b(a(b(x1))) → a(b(a(x1))) (1)
c(c(a(x1))) → b(a(c(x1))) (2)
c(a(c(x1))) → b(b(c(x1))) (3)
b(a(c(x1))) → a(c(c(x1))) (4)
c(a(b(x1))) → a(b(c(x1))) (5)
b(a(a(x1))) → a(c(c(x1))) (6)
b(c(b(x1))) → a(b(a(x1))) (7)

Property / Task

Prove or disprove termination.

Answer / Result

Yes.

Proof (by matchbox @ termCOMP 2023)

1 Dependency Pair Transformation

The following set of initial dependency pairs has been identified.
c#(c(a(x1))) → c#(x1) (8)
c#(c(a(x1))) → b#(a(c(x1))) (9)
c#(a(c(x1))) → b#(c(x1)) (10)
c#(a(c(x1))) → b#(b(c(x1))) (11)
c#(a(b(x1))) → c#(x1) (12)
c#(a(b(x1))) → b#(c(x1)) (13)
b#(c(b(x1))) → b#(a(x1)) (14)
b#(a(c(x1))) → c#(c(x1)) (15)
b#(a(b(x1))) → b#(a(x1)) (16)
b#(a(a(x1))) → c#(x1) (17)
b#(a(a(x1))) → c#(c(x1)) (18)

1.1 Monotonic Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules

Using the matrix interpretations of dimension 1 with strict dimension 1 over the rationals with delta = 1
[c(x1)] = x1 +
2
[b(x1)] = x1 +
2
[a(x1)] = x1 +
2
[c#(x1)] = x1 +
2
[b#(x1)] = x1 +
1
together with the usable rules
b(a(b(x1))) → a(b(a(x1))) (1)
c(c(a(x1))) → b(a(c(x1))) (2)
c(a(c(x1))) → b(b(c(x1))) (3)
b(a(c(x1))) → a(c(c(x1))) (4)
c(a(b(x1))) → a(b(c(x1))) (5)
b(a(a(x1))) → a(c(c(x1))) (6)
b(c(b(x1))) → a(b(a(x1))) (7)
(w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the reduction pair), the pairs
c#(c(a(x1))) → c#(x1) (8)
c#(c(a(x1))) → b#(a(c(x1))) (9)
c#(a(c(x1))) → b#(c(x1)) (10)
c#(a(c(x1))) → b#(b(c(x1))) (11)
c#(a(b(x1))) → c#(x1) (12)
c#(a(b(x1))) → b#(c(x1)) (13)
b#(c(b(x1))) → b#(a(x1)) (14)
b#(a(c(x1))) → c#(c(x1)) (15)
b#(a(b(x1))) → b#(a(x1)) (16)
b#(a(a(x1))) → c#(x1) (17)
b#(a(a(x1))) → c#(c(x1)) (18)
and no rules could be deleted.

1.1.1 Dependency Graph Processor

The dependency pairs are split into 0 components.