by T2Cert
0 | 0 | 1: | 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ 1 − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ 1 − arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1P + arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1P − arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2P + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg2P − arg2 ≤ 0 | |
1 | 1 | 1: | 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 1 − arg1 + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ 1 − arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1 − arg2P + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1 + arg2P − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2P + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg2P − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ arg1P − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1 − arg1 ≤ 0 | |
2 | 2 | 0: | 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1P + arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1P − arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2P + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg2P − arg2 ≤ 0 |
The following invariants are asserted.
0: | TRUE |
1: | 1 − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ 1 − arg1 ≤ 0 |
2: | TRUE |
The invariants are proved as follows.
0 | (0) | TRUE | ||
1 | (1) | 1 − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ 1 − arg1 ≤ 0 | ||
2 | (2) | TRUE |
0 | 0 1 | |
1 | 1 1 | |
2 | 2 0 |
1 | 3 | : | − arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ arg2P − arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg2 − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ arg1P − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1 − arg1 ≤ 0 |
We remove transitions
, using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −11.2: | 0 |
0: | 0 |
1: | 0 |
: | −4 |
: | −5 |
: | −6 |
: | −6 |
: | −6 |
4 | lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ] |
lexWeak[ [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] ] | |
lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ] |
The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.
6 : − arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ arg2P − arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg2 − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ arg1P − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1 − arg1 ≤ 0
The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.
4 : − arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ arg2P − arg2P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ arg2 − arg2 ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ arg1P − arg1P ≤ 0 ∧ − arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0 ∧ arg1 − arg1 ≤ 0
We consider subproblems for each of the 1 SCC(s) of the program graph.
Here we consider the SCC {
, , }.We remove transition
using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 2.: | −2 + 6⋅arg1 − 3⋅arg2 |
: | 3⋅arg1 − 3⋅arg2 |
: | −1 + 6⋅arg1 − 3⋅arg2 |
4 | lexWeak[ [0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 3, 0] ] |
6 | lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 6, 0] ] |
lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 6, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ] |
We remove transitions 4, 6 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −1.
: | 0 |
: | − arg1 |
: | arg1P |
4 | lexStrict[ [0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ] |
6 | lexStrict[ [1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ] |
We consider 1 subproblems corresponding to sets of cut-point transitions as follows.
There remain no cut-point transition to consider. Hence the cooperation termination is trivial.
T2Cert