Termination proof of /tmp/tmpxux4di/MinusMin.jar

Termination of the given JBC could be proven:

0 JBC

↳1 JBCToGraph (⇒, 390 ms)

↳2 JBCTerminationGraph

↳3 TerminationGraphToSCCProof (⇒, 0 ms)

↳4 JBCTerminationSCC

↳5 SCCToIDPv1Proof (⇒, 90 ms)

↳6 IDP

↳7 IDPNonInfProof (⇒, 220 ms)

↳8 AND

    ↳9 IDP

        ↳10 IDPNonInfProof (⇒, 50 ms)

        ↳11 AND

            ↳12 IDP

                ↳13 IDependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)

                ↳14 TRUE

            ↳15 IDP

                ↳16 IDependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)

                ↳17 TRUE

    ↳18 IDP

        ↳19 IDependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)

        ↳20 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

JBC Problem based on JBC Program:
Manifest-Version: 1.0 Created-By: 1.6.0_16 (Sun Microsystems Inc.) Main-Class: MinusMin

public class MinusMin{

  public static int min (int x, int y) {

    if (x < y) return x;
    else return y;
  }


  public static void main(String[] args) {
    Random.args = args;
    int x = Random.random();
    int y = Random.random();
    int res = 0;



    while (min(x-1,y) == y) {

      y++;
      res++;

    }


  }

}


public class Random {
  static String[] args;
  static int index = 0;

  public static int random() {
    String string = args[index];
    index++;
    return string.length();
  }
}

(1) JBCToGraph (SOUND transformation)

Constructed TerminationGraph.

(2) Obligation:

Termination Graph based on JBC Program:
MinusMin.main([Ljava/lang/String;)V: Graph of 197 nodes with 1 SCC.

(3) TerminationGraphToSCCProof (SOUND transformation)

Splitted TerminationGraph to 1 SCCs.

(4) Obligation:

SCC of termination graph based on JBC Program.
SCC contains nodes from the following methods: MinusMin.main([Ljava/lang/String;)V
SCC calls the following helper methods:
Performed SCC analyses: UsedFieldsAnalysis

(5) SCCToIDPv1Proof (SOUND transformation)

Transformed FIGraph SCCs to IDPs. Log:

Generated 25 rules for P and 0 rules for R.

P rules:
624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(EOS(STATIC_624), i18, i95, i18) → 626_0_main_IntArithmetic(EOS(STATIC_626), i18, i95, i18, 1)
626_0_main_IntArithmetic(EOS(STATIC_626), i18, i95, i18, matching1) → 628_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_628), i18, i95, -(i18, 1)) | &&(>=(i18, 0), =(matching1, 1))
628_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_628), i18, i95, i102) → 629_0_main_InvokeMethod(EOS(STATIC_629), i18, i95, i102, i95)
629_0_main_InvokeMethod(EOS(STATIC_629), i18, i95, i102, i95) → 631_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_631), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95)
631_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_631), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) → 633_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_633), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102)
633_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_633), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102) → 636_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_636), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95)
636_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_636), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) → 638_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_638), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95)
636_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_636), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) → 639_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_639), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95)
638_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_638), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) → 641_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_641), i18, i95, i102, i95, i95) | >=(i102, i95)
641_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_641), i18, i95, i102, i95, i95) → 645_0_min_Return(EOS(STATIC_645), i18, i95, i102, i95, i95)
645_0_min_Return(EOS(STATIC_645), i18, i95, i102, i95, i95) → 649_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_649), i18, i95, i95)
649_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_649), i18, i95, i95) → 655_0_main_NE(EOS(STATIC_655), i18, i95, i95, i95)
655_0_main_NE(EOS(STATIC_655), i18, i95, i95, i95) → 662_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_662), i18, i95)
662_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_662), i18, i95) → 674_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_674), i18, i95)
674_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_674), i18, i95) → 678_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_678), i18, +(i95, 1))
678_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_678), i18, i109) → 679_0_main_JMP(EOS(STATIC_679), i18, i109)
679_0_main_JMP(EOS(STATIC_679), i18, i109) → 692_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_692), i18, i109)
692_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_692), i18, i109) → 622_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_622), i18, i109)
622_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_622), i18, i95) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(EOS(STATIC_624), i18, i95, i18)
639_0_min_GE(EOS(STATIC_639), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) → 643_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_643), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) | <(i102, i95)
643_0_min_Load(EOS(STATIC_643), i18, i95, i102, i95, i102, i95) → 647_0_min_Return(EOS(STATIC_647), i18, i95, i102, i95, i95, i102)
647_0_min_Return(EOS(STATIC_647), i18, i95, i102, i95, i95, i102) → 653_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_653), i18, i95, i102)
653_0_main_Load(EOS(STATIC_653), i18, i95, i102) → 660_0_main_NE(EOS(STATIC_660), i18, i95, i102, i95)
660_0_main_NE(EOS(STATIC_660), i18, i95, i95, i95) → 665_0_main_NE(EOS(STATIC_665), i18, i95, i95, i95)
665_0_main_NE(EOS(STATIC_665), i18, i95, i95, i95) → 674_0_main_Inc(EOS(STATIC_674), i18, i95)
R rules:

Combined rules. Obtained 2 conditional rules for P and 0 conditional rules for R.

P rules:
624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(EOS(STATIC_624), x0, x1, x0) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(EOS(STATIC_624), x0, +(x1, 1), x0) | &&(<=(x1, -(x0, 1)), >(+(x0, 1), 0))
624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(EOS(STATIC_624), x0, -(x0, 1), x0) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(EOS(STATIC_624), x0, +(-(x0, 1), 1), x0) | &&(>(+(x0, 1), 0), <(-(x0, 1), -(x0, 1)))
R rules:

Filtered ground terms:

624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x2, x3, x4) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x2, x3, x4)
EOS(x1) → EOS
Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush1(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) → Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush1(x1, x3, x4, x5)
Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) → Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x3, x4, x5)

Filtered duplicate args:

624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x2, x3) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x2, x3)
Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x2, x3, x4) → Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x3, x4)
Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush1(x1, x2, x3, x4) → Cond_624_0_main_ConstantStackPush1(x1, x3)

Combined rules. Obtained 2 conditional rules for P and 0 conditional rules for R.

P rules:
624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x1, x0) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(+(x1, 1), x0) | &&(<=(x1, -(x0, 1)), >(x0, -1))
624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(x0_-1, x0) → 624_0_main_ConstantStackPush(+(-(x0, 1), 1), x0) | &&(&&(>(x0, -1), <(-(x0, 1), -(x0, 1))), =(x0_-1, -(x0, 1)))
R rules:

Finished conversion. Obtained 4 rules for P and 0 rules for R. System has predefined symbols.

P rules:
624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1, x0) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1, -(x0, 1)), >(x0, -1)), x1, x0)
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1, x0) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1, 1), x0)
624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1, x0) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0, -1), <(-(x0, 1), -(x0, 1))), =(x0_-1, -(x0, 1))), x0_-1, x0)
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1, x0) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0, 1), 1), x0)
R rules:

(6) Obligation:

IDP problem:
The following function symbols are pre-defined:

!=	~	Neq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
*	~	Mul: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
>=	~	Ge: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-1	~	UnaryMinus: (Integer) -> Integer
\|	~	Bwor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
/	~	Div: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
=	~	Eq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
	~	Bwxor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
\|\|	~	Lor: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean
!	~	Lnot: (Boolean) -> Boolean
<	~	Lt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-	~	Sub: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
<=	~	Le: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
>	~	Gt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
~	~	Bwnot: (Integer) -> Integer
%	~	Mod: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&	~	Bwand: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
+	~	Add: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&&	~	Land: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean

The following domains are used:

Boolean, Integer

R is empty.

The integer pair graph contains the following rules and edges:
(0): 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0] <= x0[0] - 1 && x0[0] > -1, x1[0], x0[0])
(1): COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[1] + 1, x0[1])
(2): 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(x0[2] > -1 && x0[2] - 1 < x0[2] - 1 && x0_-1[2] = x0[2] - 1, x0_-1[2], x0[2])
(3): COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0[3] - 1 + 1, x0[3])

(0) -> (1), if (x1[0] <= x0[0] - 1 && x0[0] > -1 ∧x1[0] →^* x1[1]∧x0[0] →^* x0[1])

(1) -> (0), if (x1[1] + 1 →^* x1[0]∧x0[1] →^* x0[0])

(1) -> (2), if (x1[1] + 1 →^* x0_-1[2]∧x0[1] →^* x0[2])

(2) -> (3), if (x0[2] > -1 && x0[2] - 1 < x0[2] - 1 && x0_-1[2] = x0[2] - 1 ∧x0_-1[2] →^* x0_-1[3]∧x0[2] →^* x0[3])

(3) -> (0), if (x0[3] - 1 + 1 →^* x1[0]∧x0[3] →^* x0[0])

(3) -> (2), if (x0[3] - 1 + 1 →^* x0_-1[2]∧x0[3] →^* x0[2])

The set Q is empty.

(7) IDPNonInfProof (SOUND transformation)

Used the following options for this NonInfProof:
IDPGPoloSolver: Range: [(-1,2)] IsNat: false Interpretation Shape Heuristic: aprove.DPFramework.IDPProblem.Processors.nonInf.poly.IdpCand1ShapeHeuristic@3d69084f Constraint Generator: NonInfConstraintGenerator: PathGenerator: MetricPathGenerator: Max Left Steps: 0 Max Right Steps: 0

The constraints were generated the following way:
The DP Problem is simplified using the Induction Calculus [NONINF] with the following steps:
Note that final constraints are written in bold face.

For Pair 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1, x0) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1, -(x0, 1)), >(x0, -1)), x1, x0) the following chains were created:

We consider the chain 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0]), COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1]) which results in the following constraint:
(1)    (&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1))=TRUE∧x1[0]=x1[1]∧x0[0]=x0[1] ⇒ 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥NonInfC∧624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])∧(U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (1) using rules (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:
(2)    (<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1))=TRUE∧>(x0[0], -1)=TRUE ⇒ 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥NonInfC∧624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])∧(U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (2) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:
(3)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_13 + (-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (3) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:
(4)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_13 + (-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (4) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:
(5)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_13 + (-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (5) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraints:
(6)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_13 + (-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)

(7)    (x0[0] + [-1] + x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_13 + (-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (6) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:
(8)    (x0[0] ≥ 0∧[1] + x1[0] + x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x1[0] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1, x0) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1, 1), x0) the following chains were created:

We consider the chain COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1]) which results in the following constraint:
(9)    (COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1])≥NonInfC∧COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1])≥624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])∧(U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (9) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:
(10)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_15] = 0∧[(-1)bso_16] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (10) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:
(11)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_15] = 0∧[(-1)bso_16] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (11) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:
(12)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_15] = 0∧[(-1)bso_16] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (12) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:
(13)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_15] = 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_16] ≥ 0)

For Pair 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1, x0) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0, -1), <(-(x0, 1), -(x0, 1))), =(x0_-1, -(x0, 1))), x0_-1, x0) the following chains were created:

We consider the chain 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2]), COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3]) which results in the following constraint:
(14)    (&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1)))=TRUE∧x0_-1[2]=x0_-1[3]∧x0[2]=x0[3] ⇒ 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2])≥NonInfC∧624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2])≥COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])∧(U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (14) using rules (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:
(15)    (>(x0[2], -1)=TRUE∧<(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))=TRUE∧>=(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))=TRUE∧<=(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))=TRUE ⇒ 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2])≥NonInfC∧624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2])≥COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])∧(U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (15) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:
(16)    (x0[2] ≥ 0∧[-1] ≥ 0∧x0_-1[2] + [1] + [-1]x0[2] ≥ 0∧x0[2] + [-1] + [-1]x0_-1[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_17 + (-1)Bound*bni_17] + [bni_17]x0[2] ≥ 0∧[-2 + (-1)bso_18] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (16) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:
(17)    (x0[2] ≥ 0∧[-1] ≥ 0∧x0_-1[2] + [1] + [-1]x0[2] ≥ 0∧x0[2] + [-1] + [-1]x0_-1[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_17 + (-1)Bound*bni_17] + [bni_17]x0[2] ≥ 0∧[-2 + (-1)bso_18] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (17) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:
(18)    (x0[2] ≥ 0∧[-1] ≥ 0∧x0_-1[2] + [1] + [-1]x0[2] ≥ 0∧x0[2] + [-1] + [-1]x0_-1[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_17 + (-1)Bound*bni_17] + [bni_17]x0[2] ≥ 0∧[-2 + (-1)bso_18] ≥ 0)

We solved constraint (18) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT).

For Pair COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1, x0) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0, 1), 1), x0) the following chains were created:

We consider the chain COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3]) which results in the following constraint:
(19)    (COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3])≥NonInfC∧COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3])≥624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])∧(U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (19) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:
(20)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])), ≥)∧[bni_19] = 0∧[2 + (-1)bso_20] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (20) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:
(21)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])), ≥)∧[bni_19] = 0∧[2 + (-1)bso_20] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (21) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:
(22)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])), ≥)∧[bni_19] = 0∧[2 + (-1)bso_20] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (22) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:
(23)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])), ≥)∧[bni_19] = 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[2 + (-1)bso_20] ≥ 0)

To summarize, we get the following constraints P_≥ for the following pairs.

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1, x0) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1, -(x0, 1)), >(x0, -1)), x1, x0)
- (x0[0] + [-1] + x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_13 + (-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)
- (x0[0] ≥ 0∧[1] + x1[0] + x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_13] + [bni_13]x1[0] + [bni_13]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_14] ≥ 0)
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1, x0) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1, 1), x0)
- ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_15] = 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_16] ≥ 0)
624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1, x0) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0, -1), <(-(x0, 1), -(x0, 1))), =(x0_-1, -(x0, 1))), x0_-1, x0)
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1, x0) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0, 1), 1), x0)
- ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])), ≥)∧[bni_19] = 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[2 + (-1)bso_20] ≥ 0)

The constraints for P_> respective P_bound are constructed from P_≥ where we just replace every occurence of "t ≥ s" in P_≥ by "t > s" respective "t ≥ c". Here c stands for the fresh constant used for P_bound.
Using the following integer polynomial ordering the resulting constraints can be solved
Polynomial interpretation over integers[POLO]:

POL(TRUE) = 0
POL(FALSE) = 0
POL(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x₁, x₂)) = [-1] + x₂
POL(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = [-1] + x₃
POL(&&(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(<=(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(-(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + [-1]x₂
POL(1) = [1]
POL(>(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(-1) = [-1]
POL(+(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = [1] + x₃
POL(<(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(=(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]

The following pairs are in P_>:

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(-(x0[3], 1), 1), x0[3])

The following pairs are in P_bound:

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])
624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0_-1[2], x0[2]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(&&(&&(>(x0[2], -1), <(-(x0[2], 1), -(x0[2], 1))), =(x0_-1[2], -(x0[2], 1))), x0_-1[2], x0[2])

The following pairs are in P_≥:

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])

There are no usable rules.

(8) Complex Obligation (AND)

(9) Obligation:

IDP problem:
The following function symbols are pre-defined:

!=	~	Neq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
*	~	Mul: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
>=	~	Ge: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-1	~	UnaryMinus: (Integer) -> Integer
\|	~	Bwor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
/	~	Div: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
=	~	Eq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
	~	Bwxor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
\|\|	~	Lor: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean
!	~	Lnot: (Boolean) -> Boolean
<	~	Lt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-	~	Sub: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
<=	~	Le: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
>	~	Gt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
~	~	Bwnot: (Integer) -> Integer
%	~	Mod: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&	~	Bwand: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
+	~	Add: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&&	~	Land: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean

The following domains are used:

Boolean, Integer

(1) -> (0), if (x1[1] + 1 →^* x1[0]∧x0[1] →^* x0[0])

(0) -> (1), if (x1[0] <= x0[0] - 1 && x0[0] > -1 ∧x1[0] →^* x1[1]∧x0[0] →^* x0[1])

The set Q is empty.

(10) IDPNonInfProof (SOUND transformation)

Used the following options for this NonInfProof:
IDPGPoloSolver: Range: [(-1,2)] IsNat: false Interpretation Shape Heuristic: aprove.DPFramework.IDPProblem.Processors.nonInf.poly.IdpCand1ShapeHeuristic@3d69084f Constraint Generator: NonInfConstraintGenerator: PathGenerator: MetricPathGenerator: Max Left Steps: 0 Max Right Steps: 0

The constraints were generated the following way:
The DP Problem is simplified using the Induction Calculus [NONINF] with the following steps:
Note that final constraints are written in bold face.

For Pair 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0]) the following chains were created:

We consider the chain 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0]), COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1]) which results in the following constraint:
(1)    (&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1))=TRUE∧x1[0]=x1[1]∧x0[0]=x0[1] ⇒ 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥NonInfC∧624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])∧(U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (1) using rules (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:
(2)    (<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1))=TRUE∧>(x0[0], -1)=TRUE ⇒ 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥NonInfC∧624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0])≥COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])∧(U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (2) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:
(3)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] + [(-1)bni_8]x1[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (3) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:
(4)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] + [(-1)bni_8]x1[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (4) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:
(5)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] + [(-1)bni_8]x1[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (5) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraints:
(6)    (x0[0] + [-1] + [-1]x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] + [(-1)bni_8]x1[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)

(7)    (x0[0] + [-1] + x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] + [bni_8]x1[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (6) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:
(8)    (x0[0] ≥ 0∧[1] + x1[0] + x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(2)bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1]) the following chains were created:

We consider the chain COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1]) which results in the following constraint:
(9)    (COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1])≥NonInfC∧COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1])≥624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])∧(U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥))

We simplified constraint (9) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:
(10)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_10] = 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_11] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (10) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:
(11)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_10] = 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_11] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (11) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:
(12)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_10] = 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_11] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (12) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:
(13)    ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_10] = 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_11] ≥ 0)

To summarize, we get the following constraints P_≥ for the following pairs.

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])
- (x0[0] + [-1] + x1[0] ≥ 0∧x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] + [bni_8]x1[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)
- (x0[0] ≥ 0∧[1] + x1[0] + x0[0] ≥ 0∧x1[0] ≥ 0 ⇒ (U^Increasing(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])), ≥)∧[(2)bni_8 + (-1)Bound*bni_8] + [bni_8]x0[0] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_9] ≥ 0)
COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])
- ((U^Increasing(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])), ≥)∧[bni_10] = 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_11] ≥ 0)

POL(TRUE) = 0
POL(FALSE) = 0
POL(624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x₁, x₂)) = [1] + x₂ + [-1]x₁
POL(COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = [1] + x₃ + [-1]x₂
POL(&&(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(<=(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(-(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + [-1]x₂
POL(1) = [1]
POL(>(x₁, x₂)) = [-1]
POL(-1) = [-1]
POL(+(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂

The following pairs are in P_>:

COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(+(x1[1], 1), x0[1])

The following pairs are in P_bound:

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])

The following pairs are in P_≥:

624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[0], x0[0]) → COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(&&(<=(x1[0], -(x0[0], 1)), >(x0[0], -1)), x1[0], x0[0])

There are no usable rules.

(11) Complex Obligation (AND)

(12) Obligation:

IDP problem:
The following function symbols are pre-defined:

!=	~	Neq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
*	~	Mul: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
>=	~	Ge: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-1	~	UnaryMinus: (Integer) -> Integer
\|	~	Bwor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
/	~	Div: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
=	~	Eq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
	~	Bwxor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
\|\|	~	Lor: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean
!	~	Lnot: (Boolean) -> Boolean
<	~	Lt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-	~	Sub: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
<=	~	Le: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
>	~	Gt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
~	~	Bwnot: (Integer) -> Integer
%	~	Mod: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&	~	Bwand: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
+	~	Add: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&&	~	Land: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean

The following domains are used:

Boolean, Integer

(13) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(14) TRUE

(15) Obligation:

IDP problem:
The following function symbols are pre-defined:

!=	~	Neq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
*	~	Mul: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
>=	~	Ge: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-1	~	UnaryMinus: (Integer) -> Integer
\|	~	Bwor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
/	~	Div: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
=	~	Eq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
	~	Bwxor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
\|\|	~	Lor: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean
!	~	Lnot: (Boolean) -> Boolean
<	~	Lt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-	~	Sub: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
<=	~	Le: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
>	~	Gt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
~	~	Bwnot: (Integer) -> Integer
%	~	Mod: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&	~	Bwand: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
+	~	Add: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&&	~	Land: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean

The following domains are used:

Integer

(16) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(17) TRUE

(18) Obligation:

IDP problem:
The following function symbols are pre-defined:

!=	~	Neq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
*	~	Mul: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
>=	~	Ge: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-1	~	UnaryMinus: (Integer) -> Integer
\|	~	Bwor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
/	~	Div: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
=	~	Eq: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
	~	Bwxor: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
\|\|	~	Lor: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean
!	~	Lnot: (Boolean) -> Boolean
<	~	Lt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
-	~	Sub: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
<=	~	Le: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
>	~	Gt: (Integer, Integer) -> Boolean
~	~	Bwnot: (Integer) -> Integer
%	~	Mod: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&	~	Bwand: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
+	~	Add: (Integer, Integer) -> Integer
&&	~	Land: (Boolean, Boolean) -> Boolean

The following domains are used:

Integer

R is empty.

The integer pair graph contains the following rules and edges:
(1): COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(TRUE, x1[1], x0[1]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x1[1] + 1, x0[1])
(3): COND_624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH1(TRUE, x0_-1[3], x0[3]) → 624_0_MAIN_CONSTANTSTACKPUSH(x0[3] - 1 + 1, x0[3])

The set Q is empty.

(19) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

(0) Obligation:

(1) JBCToGraph (SOUND transformation)

(2) Obligation:

(3) TerminationGraphToSCCProof (SOUND transformation)

(4) Obligation:

(5) SCCToIDPv1Proof (SOUND transformation)

(6) Obligation:

(7) IDPNonInfProof (SOUND transformation)

(8) Complex Obligation (AND)

(9) Obligation:

(10) IDPNonInfProof (SOUND transformation)

(11) Complex Obligation (AND)

(12) Obligation:

(13) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(14) TRUE

(15) Obligation:

(16) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(17) TRUE

(18) Obligation:

(19) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(20) TRUE