LTS Termination Proof

by AProVE

Input

Integer Transition System

Proof

1 Switch to Cooperation Termination Proof

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:
l5 l5 l5: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l7 l7 l7: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l11 l11 l11: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l1 l1 l1: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l3 l3 l3: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l13 l13 l13: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l2 l2 l2: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l9 l9 l9: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l14 l14 l14: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l6 l6 l6: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l10 l10 l10: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l8 l8 l8: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l15 l15 l15: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l0 l0 l0: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = x7
l12 l12 l12: x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5 ∧ x6 = x6 ∧ x7 = 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 { l0, l2 }.

2.1.1 Transition Removal

We remove transition 2 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

l0: 100 − x1
l2: 100 − x1

2.1.2 Transition Removal

We remove transition 3 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

l2: 0
l0: −1

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 { l7, l6, l10, l11, l1, l8, l13, l12, l9 }.

2.2.1 Transition Removal

We remove transition 20 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

l1: 99 − x7
l10: 99 − x7
l7: 98 − x7
l6: 98 − x7
l13: 98 − x7
l12: 98 − x7
l9: 98 − x7
l8: 98 − x7
l11: 98 − x7

2.2.2 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 6, 16, 15 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

l1: −1
l10: −1
l7: −1
l6: 0
l13: 1
l12: 1
l9: 1
l8: 1
l11: 1

2.2.3 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 11, 7, 14 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

l1: 0
l10: −1
l7: 1 + 0⋅x3
l13: 100 − x2 − x7
l12: 100 − x2 − x7
l9: 100 − x2 − x7
l8: 99 − x2 − x7
l11: 99 − x2 − x7

2.2.4 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 17, 18, 10, 13, 12 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

l13: 0
l12: −1
l9: 1
l8: 2
l11: 3

2.2.5 Trivial Cooperation Program

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

Tool configuration

AProVE