LTS Termination Proof

by T2Cert

Input

Integer Transition System

Proof

1 Invariant Updates

The following invariants are asserted.

0: TRUE
1: arg2P ≤ 0arg2 ≤ 0
2: TRUE
3: TRUE

The invariants are proved as follows.

IMPACT Invariant Proof

2 Switch to Cooperation Termination Proof

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:
1 5 1: arg3P + arg3P ≤ 0arg3Parg3P ≤ 0arg3 + arg3 ≤ 0arg3arg3 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0
2 12 2: 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, 4 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −13.

3: 0
0: 0
1: 0
2: 0
3: −4
0: −5
1: −6
2: −6
1_var_snapshot: −6
1*: −6
2_var_snapshot: −6
2*: −6
Hints:
6 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
13 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
1 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
2 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 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 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] ]
4 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.

1* 8 1: 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.

1 6 1_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.

2* 15 2: 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.

2 13 2_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 1 SCC(s) of the program graph.

8.1 SCC Subproblem 1/1

Here we consider the SCC { 1, 2, 1_var_snapshot, 1*, 2_var_snapshot, 2* }.

8.1.1 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 6, 1, 2, 3 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −4.

1: −2 + 7⋅arg2
2: arg2 + arg3
1_var_snapshot: −3 + 7⋅arg2
1*: −1 + 7⋅arg2
2_var_snapshot: arg2 + arg3
2*: 1 + arg2 + arg3
Hints:
6 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 7, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
8 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
13 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
15 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
1 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 7, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 7, 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, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 7, 7, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
3 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

8.1.2 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 8, 13, 15 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −2.

1: −1
2: 0
1_var_snapshot: −2
1*: 0
2_var_snapshot: −1
2*: 1
Hints:
8 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] ]
13 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] ]
15 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] ]

8.1.3 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

We consider 2 subproblems corresponding to sets of cut-point transitions as follows.

8.1.3.1 Cut-Point Subproblem 1/2

Here we consider cut-point transition 5.

8.1.3.1.1 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

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

8.1.3.2 Cut-Point Subproblem 2/2

Here we consider cut-point transition 12.

8.1.3.2.1 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

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

Tool configuration

T2Cert