LTS Termination Proof

by AProVE

Input

Integer Transition System

Proof

1 Switch to Cooperation Termination Proof

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:
f648_0_create_GT f648_0_create_GT f648_0_create_GT: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f3952_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_NULL f3952_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_NULL f3952_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_NULL: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f3684_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_EQ f3684_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_EQ f3684_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_EQ: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f1260_0_create_Return f1260_0_create_Return f1260_0_create_Return: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f2576_0_create_GE f2576_0_create_GE f2576_0_create_GE: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f1_0_main_Load f1_0_main_Load f1_0_main_Load: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f1262_0_create_Return f1262_0_create_Return f1262_0_create_Return: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f3568_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_CheckCast f3568_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_CheckCast f3568_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_CheckCast: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
f2800_0_random_ArrayAccess f2800_0_random_ArrayAccess f2800_0_random_ArrayAccess: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
__init __init __init: x1 = x1x2 = x2x3 = x3x4 = x4x5 = x5x6 = x6x7 = x7
and for every transition t, a duplicate t is considered.

2 SCC Decomposition

We consider subproblems for each of the 2 SCC(s) of the program graph.

2.1 SCC Subproblem 1/2

Here we consider the SCC { f648_0_create_GT, f2576_0_create_GE }.

2.1.1 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 10, 11 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

f648_0_create_GT: 1 + 2⋅x1
f2576_0_create_GE: 2⋅x1

2.1.2 Transition Removal

We remove transition 12 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

f2576_0_create_GE: x2 + x3

2.1.3 Trivial Cooperation Program

There are no more "sharp" transitions in the cooperation program. Hence the cooperation termination is proved.

2.2 SCC Subproblem 2/2

Here we consider the SCC { f3952_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_NULL, f3684_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_EQ, f3568_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_CheckCast }.

2.2.1 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 13, 16, 15, 14, 17, 18, 19 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

f3568_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_CheckCast: 1 + x1
f3684_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_EQ: x1
f3952_0_extendMatchingSubstitution_NULL: x2

2.2.2 Trivial Cooperation Program

There are no more "sharp" transitions in the cooperation program. Hence the cooperation termination is proved.

Tool configuration

AProVE