Termination w.r.t. Q proof of Transformed_CSR_04_Ex49_GM04

Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

0 QTRS

↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔, 0 ms)

↳2 QDP

↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)

↳4 AND

    ↳5 QDP

        ↳6 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳7 QDP

        ↳8 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳9 YES

    ↳10 QDP

        ↳11 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳12 QDP

        ↳13 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳14 YES

    ↳15 QDP

        ↳16 QDPOrderProof (⇔, 29 ms)

        ↳17 QDP

        ↳18 TransformationProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳19 QDP

        ↳20 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳21 QDP

        ↳22 QDPOrderProof (⇔, 28 ms)

        ↳23 QDP

        ↳24 TransformationProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳25 QDP

        ↳26 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳27 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(2) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → A__MINUS(X, Y)
A__GEQ(s(X), s(Y)) → A__GEQ(X, Y)
A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__GEQ(X, Y)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y)
MARK(minus(X1, X2)) → A__MINUS(X1, X2)
MARK(geq(X1, X2)) → A__GEQ(X1, X2)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → A__IF(mark(X1), X2, X3)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 3 SCCs with 3 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__GEQ(s(X), s(Y)) → A__GEQ(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(6) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(7) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__GEQ(s(X), s(Y)) → A__GEQ(X, Y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(8) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

A__GEQ(s(X), s(Y)) → A__GEQ(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(9) YES

(10) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → A__MINUS(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(11) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(12) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → A__MINUS(X, Y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(13) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

A__MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → A__MINUS(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(14) YES

(15) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)
A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → A__IF(mark(X1), X2, X3)
A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(16) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → A__IF(mark(X1), X2, X3)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation:

POL( A__DIV(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₂ + 2

POL( A__IF(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = x₂ + x₃ + 2

POL( mark(x₁) ) = x₁

POL( minus(x₁, x₂) ) = 0

POL( a__minus(x₁, x₂) ) = 0

POL( geq(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + x₂

POL( a__geq(x₁, x₂) ) = 0

POL( div(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + 2x₂

POL( a__div(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + 2x₂

POL( s(x₁) ) = x₁

POL( a__if(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = x₁ + x₂

POL( 0 ) = 0

POL( true ) = 0

POL( if(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = x₁ + x₂ + x₃ + 2

POL( false ) = 0

POL( MARK(x₁) ) = x₁ + 2

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:
none

(17) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)
A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(18) TransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By instantiating [LPAR04] the rule A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y) we obtained the following new rules [LPAR04]:

A__IF(false, s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))), 0) → MARK(0) → A__IF(false, s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))), 0) → MARK(0)

(19) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)
A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
A__IF(false, s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))), 0) → MARK(0)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(20) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.

(21) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(22) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

MARK(div(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation:

POL( A__DIV(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + 2

POL( A__IF(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = max{0, 2x₁ + x₂ + x₃ - 2}

POL( a__geq(x₁, x₂) ) = 1

POL( 0 ) = 2

POL( true ) = 1

POL( s(x₁) ) = x₁ + 2

POL( false ) = 0

POL( geq(x₁, x₂) ) = 1

POL( mark(x₁) ) = x₁

POL( minus(x₁, x₂) ) = x₁

POL( a__minus(x₁, x₂) ) = x₁

POL( div(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + 2

POL( a__div(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + 2

POL( a__if(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = x₂ + x₃

POL( if(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = x₂ + x₃

POL( MARK(x₁) ) = x₁

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:

a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)
a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)

(23) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(24) TransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By instantiating [LPAR04] the rule A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X) we obtained the following new rules [LPAR04]:

A__IF(true, s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))), 0) → MARK(s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5)))) → A__IF(true, s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))), 0) → MARK(s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))))

(25) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

A__DIV(s(X), s(Y)) → A__IF(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
MARK(div(X1, X2)) → A__DIV(mark(X1), X2)
A__IF(true, s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))), 0) → MARK(s(div(minus(y_3, y_4), s(y_5))))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__minus(0, Y) → 0
a__minus(s(X), s(Y)) → a__minus(X, Y)
a__geq(X, 0) → true
a__geq(0, s(Y)) → false
a__geq(s(X), s(Y)) → a__geq(X, Y)
a__div(0, s(Y)) → 0
a__div(s(X), s(Y)) → a__if(a__geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
mark(minus(X1, X2)) → a__minus(X1, X2)
mark(geq(X1, X2)) → a__geq(X1, X2)
mark(div(X1, X2)) → a__div(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
a__minus(X1, X2) → minus(X1, X2)
a__geq(X1, X2) → geq(X1, X2)
a__div(X1, X2) → div(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(26) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 3 less nodes.

(0) Obligation:

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(2) Obligation:

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

(6) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(7) Obligation:

(8) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(9) YES

(10) Obligation:

(11) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(12) Obligation:

(13) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(14) YES

(15) Obligation:

(16) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(17) Obligation:

(18) TransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(19) Obligation:

(20) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(21) Obligation:

(22) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(23) Obligation:

(24) TransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(25) Obligation:

(26) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(27) TRUE