LTS Termination Proof

Input

Integer Transition System

Initial Location: l4, l3, l0, l2

Transitions: (pre-variables and post-variables)

l0	1	l1:	x1 = _Result_4HAT0 ∧ x2 = ____cil_tmp4_8HAT0 ∧ x3 = ____retres3_7HAT0 ∧ x4 = _i_5HAT0 ∧ x5 = _x_6HAT0 ∧ x1 = _Result_4HATpost ∧ x2 = ____cil_tmp4_8HATpost ∧ x3 = ____retres3_7HATpost ∧ x4 = _i_5HATpost ∧ x5 = _x_6HATpost ∧ _x_6HAT0 = _x_6HATpost ∧ _i_5HAT0 = _i_5HATpost ∧ _Result_4HATpost = ____cil_tmp4_8HATpost ∧ ____cil_tmp4_8HATpost = ____retres3_7HATpost ∧ ____retres3_7HATpost = 0 ∧ 10 − _x_6HAT0 ≤ 0
l0	2	l1:	x1 = _x ∧ x2 = _x1 ∧ x3 = _x2 ∧ x4 = _x3 ∧ x5 = _x4 ∧ x1 = _x5 ∧ x2 = _x6 ∧ x3 = _x7 ∧ x4 = _x8 ∧ x5 = _x9 ∧ _x4 = _x9 ∧ _x3 = _x8 ∧ _x5 = _x6 ∧ _x6 = _x7 ∧ _x7 = 0 ∧ −100 + _x3 ≤ 0 ∧ 0 ≤ 9 − _x4
l0	3	l2:	x1 = _x10 ∧ x2 = _x11 ∧ x3 = _x12 ∧ x4 = _x13 ∧ x5 = _x14 ∧ x1 = _x15 ∧ x2 = _x16 ∧ x3 = _x17 ∧ x4 = _x18 ∧ x5 = _x19 ∧ _x14 = _x19 ∧ _x12 = _x17 ∧ _x11 = _x16 ∧ _x10 = _x15 ∧ _x18 = −1 + _x13 ∧ 0 ≤ −101 + _x13 ∧ 0 ≤ 9 − _x14
l2	4	l0:	x1 = _x20 ∧ x2 = _x21 ∧ x3 = _x22 ∧ x4 = _x23 ∧ x5 = _x24 ∧ x1 = _x25 ∧ x2 = _x26 ∧ x3 = _x27 ∧ x4 = _x28 ∧ x5 = _x29 ∧ _x24 = _x29 ∧ _x23 = _x28 ∧ _x22 = _x27 ∧ _x21 = _x26 ∧ _x20 = _x25
l3	5	l0:	x1 = _x30 ∧ x2 = _x31 ∧ x3 = _x32 ∧ x4 = _x33 ∧ x5 = _x34 ∧ x1 = _x35 ∧ x2 = _x36 ∧ x3 = _x37 ∧ x4 = _x38 ∧ x5 = _x39 ∧ _x34 = _x39 ∧ _x32 = _x37 ∧ _x31 = _x36 ∧ _x30 = _x35 ∧ _x38 = 1000
l4	6	l3:	x1 = _x40 ∧ x2 = _x41 ∧ x3 = _x42 ∧ x4 = _x43 ∧ x5 = _x44 ∧ x1 = _x45 ∧ x2 = _x46 ∧ x3 = _x47 ∧ x4 = _x48 ∧ x5 = _x49 ∧ _x44 = _x49 ∧ _x43 = _x48 ∧ _x42 = _x47 ∧ _x41 = _x46 ∧ _x40 = _x45

Proof

1 Switch to Cooperation Termination Proof

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:

l4	l4	l4:	x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5
l3	l3	l3:	x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5
l0	l0	l0:	x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5
l2	l2	l2:	x1 = x1 ∧ x2 = x2 ∧ x3 = x3 ∧ x4 = x4 ∧ x5 = x5

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

2 SCC Decomposition

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

2.1 SCC Subproblem 1/1

Here we consider the SCC { l0, l2 }.

2.1.1 Transition Removal

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

l0:	−1 + x4 − x5
l2:	−1 + x4 − x5

2.1.2 Transition Removal

We remove transition 4 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.

Tool configuration

AProVE

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