LTS Termination Proof

Input

Integer Transition System

Transitions: (pre-variables and post-variables)

f1_0_main_Load	1	f160_0_main_LE:	x1 = _arg1 ∧ x2 = _arg2 ∧ x1 = _arg1P ∧ x2 = _arg2P ∧ 1 = _arg2P ∧ 0 ≤ _arg1 − 1 ∧ −1 ≤ _arg1P − 1 ∧ −1 ≤ _arg2 − 1
f160_0_main_LE	2	f160_0_main_LE:	x1 = _x ∧ x2 = _x1 ∧ x1 = _x2 ∧ x2 = _x3 ∧ _x1 + 1 = _x3 ∧ _x + 11 = _x2 ∧ 0 ≤ _x1 − 1 ∧ _x ≤ 100
f160_0_main_LE	3	f160_0_main_LE:	x1 = _x4 ∧ x2 = _x5 ∧ x1 = _x6 ∧ x2 = _x7 ∧ _x5 − 1 = _x7 ∧ _x4 − 10 = _x6 ∧ 0 ≤ _x5 − 1 ∧ 100 ≤ _x4 − 1
__init	4	f1_0_main_Load:	x1 = _x8 ∧ x2 = _x9 ∧ x1 = _x10 ∧ x2 = _x11 ∧ 0 ≤ 0

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:

and for every transition t, a duplicate t is considered.

We consider subproblems for each of the 1 SCC(s) of the program graph.

Here we consider the SCC { f160_0_main_LE }.

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

f160_0_main_LE:

90 − x1 + 10⋅x2

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

f160_0_main_LE:

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

version: AProVE Commit ID: unknown
strategy: Statistics for single proof: 100.00 % (5 real / 0 unknown / 0 assumptions / 5 total proof steps)