LTS Termination Proof

by T2Cert

Input

Integer Transition System

Proof

1 Invariant Updates

The following invariants are asserted.

0: TRUE
1: 1 − arg1P ≤ 01 − arg1 ≤ 0
2: TRUE
3: 1 − arg2P ≤ 01 − arg1 ≤ 01 − arg2 ≤ 0
4: 1 − arg1P ≤ 0arg2P ≤ 01 − arg1 ≤ 0arg2 ≤ 0
5: TRUE

The invariants are proved as follows.

IMPACT Invariant Proof

2 Switch to Cooperation Termination Proof

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:
2 11 2: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0
4 18 4: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0
and for every transition t, a duplicate t is considered.

3 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 0, 1, 2, 7, 10 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −17.

5: 0
0: 0
1: 0
4: 0
2: 0
3: 0
5: −6
0: −7
1: −8
4: −9
4_var_snapshot: −9
4*: −9
2: −12
3: −12
2_var_snapshot: −12
2*: −12
Hints:
12 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
19 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
3 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
4 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
5 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
6 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
8 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
9 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
0 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
1 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
2 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
7 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
10 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

4 Location Addition

The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.

2* 14 2: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0

5 Location Addition

The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.

2 12 2_var_snapshot: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0

6 Location Addition

The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.

4* 21 4: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0

7 Location Addition

The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.

4 19 4_var_snapshot: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0

8 SCC Decomposition

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

8.1 SCC Subproblem 1/2

Here we consider the SCC { 4, 4_var_snapshot, 4* }.

8.1.1 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 19, 21, 8, 9 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 2.

4: 2 + 3⋅arg1
4_var_snapshot: 3⋅arg1
4*: 4 + 3⋅arg1
Hints:
19 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0] , [0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
21 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0] , [0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
8 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
9 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

8.1.2 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

We consider 1 subproblems corresponding to sets of cut-point transitions as follows.

8.1.2.1 Cut-Point Subproblem 1/1

Here we consider cut-point transition 18.

8.1.2.1.1 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

There remain no cut-point transition to consider. Hence the cooperation termination is trivial.

8.2 SCC Subproblem 2/2

Here we consider the SCC { 2, 3, 2_var_snapshot, 2* }.

8.2.1 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 3, 4, 5, 6 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 4.

2: −3 + 2⋅arg2 + 3⋅arg3
3: 5⋅arg3
2_var_snapshot: −4 + 2⋅arg2 + 3⋅arg3
2*: −2 + 2⋅arg2 + 3⋅arg3
Hints:
12 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
14 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
3 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 3, 0, 0, 2, 0, 3, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
4 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
5 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
6 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

8.2.2 Transition Removal

We remove transition 12 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −1.

2: 0
3: 0
2_var_snapshot: −1
2*: 1
Hints:
12 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
14 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

8.2.3 Transition Removal

We remove transition 14 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 0.

2: 0
3: 0
2_var_snapshot: 0
2*: 1
Hints:
14 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

8.2.4 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

We consider 1 subproblems corresponding to sets of cut-point transitions as follows.

8.2.4.1 Cut-Point Subproblem 1/1

Here we consider cut-point transition 11.

8.2.4.1.1 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

There remain no cut-point transition to consider. Hence the cooperation termination is trivial.

Tool configuration

T2Cert