### (0) Obligation:

JBC Problem based on JBC Program:
`No human-readable program information known.`

Manifest-Version: 1.0 Created-By: 1.6.0_20 (Apple Inc.) Main-Class: Test9

### (1) JBC2FIG (SOUND transformation)

Constructed FIGraph.

### (2) Obligation:

FIGraph based on JBC Program:
Graph of 175 nodes with 1 SCC.

### (3) FIGtoITRSProof (SOUND transformation)

Transformed FIGraph to ITRS rules

### (4) Obligation:

ITRS 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 TRS R consists of the following rules:
Load792(i4, i7, i7, i149) → Cond_Load792(i149 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i149)
Cond_Load792(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i149) → Load792(i4, i7, i7, i149 + -1)
Load740(i4, i7, i7, i7, i139) → Cond_Load740(i139 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i139)
Cond_Load740(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i139) → Load740(i4, i7, i7, i7, i139 + -1)
Load688(i4, i7, i7, i7, i126) → Cond_Load688(i126 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i126)
Cond_Load688(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i126) → Load688(i4, i7, i7, i7, i126 + -1)
Load635(i4, i7, i7, i7, i118) → Cond_Load635(i118 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i118)
Cond_Load635(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i118) → Load635(i4, i7, i7, i7, i118 + -1)
Load578(i4, i7, i7, i7, i106) → Cond_Load578(i106 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i106)
Cond_Load578(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i106) → Load578(i4, i7, i7, i7, i106 + -1)
Load527(i4, i7, i7, i7, i94) → Cond_Load527(i94 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i94)
Cond_Load527(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i94) → Load527(i4, i7, i7, i7, i94 + -1)
Load472(i4, i7, i7, i7, i83) → Cond_Load472(i83 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i83)
Cond_Load472(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i83) → Load472(i4, i7, i7, i7, i83 + -1)
Load404(i4, i7, i7, i7, i69) → Cond_Load404(i69 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i69)
Cond_Load404(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i69) → Load404(i4, i7, i7, i7, i69 + -1)
Load348(i4, i7, i7, i7, i58) → Cond_Load348(i58 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i58)
Cond_Load348(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i58) → Load348(i4, i7, i7, i7, i58 + -1)
Load290(i4, i7, i7, i7, i47) → Cond_Load290(i47 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i47)
Cond_Load290(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i47) → Load290(i4, i7, i7, i7, i47 + -1)
Load230(i4, i7, i7, i7, i32) → Cond_Load230(i32 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i32)
Cond_Load230(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i32) → Load230(i4, i7, i7, i7, i32 + -1)
Load83(i4, i7) → Cond_Load83(i7 > 0 && i7 < 100, i4, i7)
Load173(i4, i7, i7, i7, i22) → Cond_Load173(i22 > 0, i4, i7, i7, i7, i22)
Cond_Load173(TRUE, i4, i7, i7, i7, i22) → Load173(i4, i7, i7, i7, i22 + -1)
Load83(i4, i7) → Cond_Load831(i7 >= 100 && i4 > 0, i4, i7)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
Cond_Load740(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load688(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load635(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load578(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load527(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load472(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load404(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load348(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load290(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load230(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)
Cond_Load173(TRUE, x0, x1, x1, x1, x2)

### (5) DuplicateArgsRemoverProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Some arguments are removed because they only appear as duplicates.
We removed arguments according to the following replacements:

### (6) Obligation:

ITRS 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 TRS R consists of the following rules:
Load83(i4, i7) → Cond_Load83(i7 > 0 && i7 < 100, i4, i7)
Load83(i4, i7) → Cond_Load831(i7 >= 100 && i4 > 0, i4, i7)
The set Q consists of the following terms:

### (8) 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, Boolean

The ITRS R consists of the following rules:
Load83(i4, i7) → Cond_Load83(i7 > 0 && i7 < 100, i4, i7)
Load83(i4, i7) → Cond_Load831(i7 >= 100 && i4 > 0, i4, i7)

The integer pair graph contains the following rules and edges:
(34): LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100, i4[34], i7[34])
(40): LOAD83(i4[40], i7[40]) → COND_LOAD831(i7[40] >= 100 && i4[40] > 0, i4[40], i7[40])

(0) -> (34), if ((i4[0]* i4[34])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[34]))

(0) -> (40), if ((i4[0]* i4[40])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[40]))

(1) -> (0), if ((i7[1]* i7[0])∧(i4[1]* i4[0])∧(i7[1]* 0))

(1) -> (2), if ((i7[1]* i7[2])∧(i7[1]* i149[2])∧(i4[1]* i4[2]))

(2) -> (3), if ((i7[2]* i7[3])∧(i149[2]* i149[3])∧(i4[2]* i4[3])∧(i149[2] > 0* TRUE))

(3) -> (0), if ((i7[3]* i7[0])∧(i4[3]* i4[0])∧(i149[3] + -1* 0))

(3) -> (2), if ((i149[3] + -1* i149[2])∧(i7[3]* i7[2])∧(i4[3]* i4[2]))

(4) -> (1), if ((i4[4]* i4[1])∧(i7[4]* i7[1])∧(i7[4]* 0))

(4) -> (5), if ((i4[4]* i4[5])∧(i7[4]* i139[5])∧(i7[4]* i7[5]))

(5) -> (6), if ((i4[5]* i4[6])∧(i139[5] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[5]* i7[6])∧(i139[5]* i139[6]))

(6) -> (1), if ((i7[6]* i7[1])∧(i139[6] + -1* 0)∧(i4[6]* i4[1]))

(6) -> (5), if ((i139[6] + -1* i139[5])∧(i7[6]* i7[5])∧(i4[6]* i4[5]))

(7) -> (4), if ((i7[7]* 0)∧(i4[7]* i4[4])∧(i7[7]* i7[4]))

(7) -> (8), if ((i7[7]* i7[8])∧(i4[7]* i4[8])∧(i7[7]* i126[8]))

(8) -> (9), if ((i7[8]* i7[9])∧(i4[8]* i4[9])∧(i126[8]* i126[9])∧(i126[8] > 0* TRUE))

(9) -> (4), if ((i126[9] + -1* 0)∧(i7[9]* i7[4])∧(i4[9]* i4[4]))

(9) -> (8), if ((i7[9]* i7[8])∧(i4[9]* i4[8])∧(i126[9] + -1* i126[8]))

(10) -> (7), if ((i7[10]* 0)∧(i4[10]* i4[7])∧(i7[10]* i7[7]))

(10) -> (11), if ((i7[10]* i118[11])∧(i4[10]* i4[11])∧(i7[10]* i7[11]))

(11) -> (12), if ((i118[11]* i118[12])∧(i7[11]* i7[12])∧(i118[11] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[11]* i4[12]))

(12) -> (7), if ((i4[12]* i4[7])∧(i118[12] + -1* 0)∧(i7[12]* i7[7]))

(12) -> (11), if ((i7[12]* i7[11])∧(i4[12]* i4[11])∧(i118[12] + -1* i118[11]))

(13) -> (10), if ((i7[13]* i7[10])∧(i4[13]* i4[10])∧(i7[13]* 0))

(13) -> (14), if ((i7[13]* i106[14])∧(i4[13]* i4[14])∧(i7[13]* i7[14]))

(14) -> (15), if ((i7[14]* i7[15])∧(i106[14] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[14]* i4[15])∧(i106[14]* i106[15]))

(15) -> (10), if ((i106[15] + -1* 0)∧(i7[15]* i7[10])∧(i4[15]* i4[10]))

(15) -> (14), if ((i4[15]* i4[14])∧(i7[15]* i7[14])∧(i106[15] + -1* i106[14]))

(16) -> (13), if ((i7[16]* i7[13])∧(i4[16]* i4[13])∧(i7[16]* 0))

(16) -> (17), if ((i7[16]* i7[17])∧(i7[16]* i94[17])∧(i4[16]* i4[17]))

(17) -> (18), if ((i94[17]* i94[18])∧(i94[17] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[17]* i7[18])∧(i4[17]* i4[18]))

(18) -> (13), if ((i4[18]* i4[13])∧(i7[18]* i7[13])∧(i94[18] + -1* 0))

(18) -> (17), if ((i7[18]* i7[17])∧(i94[18] + -1* i94[17])∧(i4[18]* i4[17]))

(19) -> (16), if ((i7[19]* i7[16])∧(i4[19]* i4[16])∧(i7[19]* 0))

(19) -> (20), if ((i4[19]* i4[20])∧(i7[19]* i7[20])∧(i7[19]* i83[20]))

(20) -> (21), if ((i4[20]* i4[21])∧(i83[20]* i83[21])∧(i7[20]* i7[21])∧(i83[20] > 0* TRUE))

(21) -> (16), if ((i4[21]* i4[16])∧(i7[21]* i7[16])∧(i83[21] + -1* 0))

(21) -> (20), if ((i83[21] + -1* i83[20])∧(i7[21]* i7[20])∧(i4[21]* i4[20]))

(22) -> (19), if ((i4[22]* i4[19])∧(i7[22]* 0)∧(i7[22]* i7[19]))

(22) -> (23), if ((i7[22]* i69[23])∧(i7[22]* i7[23])∧(i4[22]* i4[23]))

(23) -> (24), if ((i69[23] > 0* TRUE)∧(i69[23]* i69[24])∧(i4[23]* i4[24])∧(i7[23]* i7[24]))

(24) -> (19), if ((i7[24]* i7[19])∧(i69[24] + -1* 0)∧(i4[24]* i4[19]))

(24) -> (23), if ((i4[24]* i4[23])∧(i69[24] + -1* i69[23])∧(i7[24]* i7[23]))

(25) -> (22), if ((i7[25]* i7[22])∧(i7[25]* 0)∧(i4[25]* i4[22]))

(25) -> (26), if ((i4[25]* i4[26])∧(i7[25]* i7[26])∧(i7[25]* i58[26]))

(26) -> (27), if ((i7[26]* i7[27])∧(i58[26] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[26]* i4[27])∧(i58[26]* i58[27]))

(27) -> (22), if ((i7[27]* i7[22])∧(i58[27] + -1* 0)∧(i4[27]* i4[22]))

(27) -> (26), if ((i4[27]* i4[26])∧(i58[27] + -1* i58[26])∧(i7[27]* i7[26]))

(28) -> (25), if ((i7[28]* i7[25])∧(i4[28]* i4[25])∧(i7[28]* 0))

(28) -> (29), if ((i7[28]* i47[29])∧(i4[28]* i4[29])∧(i7[28]* i7[29]))

(29) -> (30), if ((i7[29]* i7[30])∧(i47[29] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[29]* i4[30])∧(i47[29]* i47[30]))

(30) -> (25), if ((i4[30]* i4[25])∧(i47[30] + -1* 0)∧(i7[30]* i7[25]))

(30) -> (29), if ((i7[30]* i7[29])∧(i47[30] + -1* i47[29])∧(i4[30]* i4[29]))

(31) -> (28), if ((i7[31]* i7[28])∧(i7[31]* 0)∧(i4[31]* i4[28]))

(31) -> (32), if ((i7[31]* i32[32])∧(i4[31]* i4[32])∧(i7[31]* i7[32]))

(32) -> (33), if ((i7[32]* i7[33])∧(i4[32]* i4[33])∧(i32[32]* i32[33])∧(i32[32] > 0* TRUE))

(33) -> (28), if ((i32[33] + -1* 0)∧(i7[33]* i7[28])∧(i4[33]* i4[28]))

(33) -> (32), if ((i4[33]* i4[32])∧(i32[33] + -1* i32[32])∧(i7[33]* i7[32]))

(34) -> (35), if ((i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100* TRUE)∧(i7[34]* i7[35])∧(i4[34]* i4[35]))

(35) -> (31), if ((i7[35]* 0)∧(i4[35]* i4[31])∧(i7[35]* i7[31]))

(35) -> (38), if ((i4[35]* i4[38])∧(i7[35]* i22[38])∧(i7[35]* i7[38]))

(36) -> (37), if ((i4[36]* i4[37])∧(i4[36] > 0 && i4[36] < 100* TRUE))

(37) -> (31), if ((i4[37]* 0)∧(i4[37]* i7[31])∧(i4[37]* i4[31]))

(37) -> (38), if ((i4[37]* i22[38])∧(i4[37]* i7[38])∧(i4[37]* i4[38]))

(38) -> (39), if ((i22[38]* i22[39])∧(i22[38] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[38]* i7[39])∧(i4[38]* i4[39]))

(39) -> (31), if ((i22[39] + -1* 0)∧(i4[39]* i4[31])∧(i7[39]* i7[31]))

(39) -> (38), if ((i7[39]* i7[38])∧(i4[39]* i4[38])∧(i22[39] + -1* i22[38]))

(40) -> (41), if ((i7[40]* i7[41])∧(i4[40]* i4[41])∧(i7[40] >= 100 && i4[40] > 0* TRUE))

(41) -> (36), if ((i4[41] - 1* i4[36]))

(41) -> (42), if ((i4[41] - 1* i4[42]))

(42) -> (43), if ((i4[42]* i4[43])∧(i4[42] >= 100* TRUE))

(43) -> (36), if ((i4[43] - 1* i4[36]))

(43) -> (42), if ((i4[43] - 1* i4[42]))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

### (9) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

### (10) 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, Boolean

R is empty.

The integer pair graph contains the following rules and edges:
(34): LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100, i4[34], i7[34])
(40): LOAD83(i4[40], i7[40]) → COND_LOAD831(i7[40] >= 100 && i4[40] > 0, i4[40], i7[40])

(0) -> (34), if ((i4[0]* i4[34])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[34]))

(0) -> (40), if ((i4[0]* i4[40])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[40]))

(1) -> (0), if ((i7[1]* i7[0])∧(i4[1]* i4[0])∧(i7[1]* 0))

(1) -> (2), if ((i7[1]* i7[2])∧(i7[1]* i149[2])∧(i4[1]* i4[2]))

(2) -> (3), if ((i7[2]* i7[3])∧(i149[2]* i149[3])∧(i4[2]* i4[3])∧(i149[2] > 0* TRUE))

(3) -> (0), if ((i7[3]* i7[0])∧(i4[3]* i4[0])∧(i149[3] + -1* 0))

(3) -> (2), if ((i149[3] + -1* i149[2])∧(i7[3]* i7[2])∧(i4[3]* i4[2]))

(4) -> (1), if ((i4[4]* i4[1])∧(i7[4]* i7[1])∧(i7[4]* 0))

(4) -> (5), if ((i4[4]* i4[5])∧(i7[4]* i139[5])∧(i7[4]* i7[5]))

(5) -> (6), if ((i4[5]* i4[6])∧(i139[5] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[5]* i7[6])∧(i139[5]* i139[6]))

(6) -> (1), if ((i7[6]* i7[1])∧(i139[6] + -1* 0)∧(i4[6]* i4[1]))

(6) -> (5), if ((i139[6] + -1* i139[5])∧(i7[6]* i7[5])∧(i4[6]* i4[5]))

(7) -> (4), if ((i7[7]* 0)∧(i4[7]* i4[4])∧(i7[7]* i7[4]))

(7) -> (8), if ((i7[7]* i7[8])∧(i4[7]* i4[8])∧(i7[7]* i126[8]))

(8) -> (9), if ((i7[8]* i7[9])∧(i4[8]* i4[9])∧(i126[8]* i126[9])∧(i126[8] > 0* TRUE))

(9) -> (4), if ((i126[9] + -1* 0)∧(i7[9]* i7[4])∧(i4[9]* i4[4]))

(9) -> (8), if ((i7[9]* i7[8])∧(i4[9]* i4[8])∧(i126[9] + -1* i126[8]))

(10) -> (7), if ((i7[10]* 0)∧(i4[10]* i4[7])∧(i7[10]* i7[7]))

(10) -> (11), if ((i7[10]* i118[11])∧(i4[10]* i4[11])∧(i7[10]* i7[11]))

(11) -> (12), if ((i118[11]* i118[12])∧(i7[11]* i7[12])∧(i118[11] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[11]* i4[12]))

(12) -> (7), if ((i4[12]* i4[7])∧(i118[12] + -1* 0)∧(i7[12]* i7[7]))

(12) -> (11), if ((i7[12]* i7[11])∧(i4[12]* i4[11])∧(i118[12] + -1* i118[11]))

(13) -> (10), if ((i7[13]* i7[10])∧(i4[13]* i4[10])∧(i7[13]* 0))

(13) -> (14), if ((i7[13]* i106[14])∧(i4[13]* i4[14])∧(i7[13]* i7[14]))

(14) -> (15), if ((i7[14]* i7[15])∧(i106[14] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[14]* i4[15])∧(i106[14]* i106[15]))

(15) -> (10), if ((i106[15] + -1* 0)∧(i7[15]* i7[10])∧(i4[15]* i4[10]))

(15) -> (14), if ((i4[15]* i4[14])∧(i7[15]* i7[14])∧(i106[15] + -1* i106[14]))

(16) -> (13), if ((i7[16]* i7[13])∧(i4[16]* i4[13])∧(i7[16]* 0))

(16) -> (17), if ((i7[16]* i7[17])∧(i7[16]* i94[17])∧(i4[16]* i4[17]))

(17) -> (18), if ((i94[17]* i94[18])∧(i94[17] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[17]* i7[18])∧(i4[17]* i4[18]))

(18) -> (13), if ((i4[18]* i4[13])∧(i7[18]* i7[13])∧(i94[18] + -1* 0))

(18) -> (17), if ((i7[18]* i7[17])∧(i94[18] + -1* i94[17])∧(i4[18]* i4[17]))

(19) -> (16), if ((i7[19]* i7[16])∧(i4[19]* i4[16])∧(i7[19]* 0))

(19) -> (20), if ((i4[19]* i4[20])∧(i7[19]* i7[20])∧(i7[19]* i83[20]))

(20) -> (21), if ((i4[20]* i4[21])∧(i83[20]* i83[21])∧(i7[20]* i7[21])∧(i83[20] > 0* TRUE))

(21) -> (16), if ((i4[21]* i4[16])∧(i7[21]* i7[16])∧(i83[21] + -1* 0))

(21) -> (20), if ((i83[21] + -1* i83[20])∧(i7[21]* i7[20])∧(i4[21]* i4[20]))

(22) -> (19), if ((i4[22]* i4[19])∧(i7[22]* 0)∧(i7[22]* i7[19]))

(22) -> (23), if ((i7[22]* i69[23])∧(i7[22]* i7[23])∧(i4[22]* i4[23]))

(23) -> (24), if ((i69[23] > 0* TRUE)∧(i69[23]* i69[24])∧(i4[23]* i4[24])∧(i7[23]* i7[24]))

(24) -> (19), if ((i7[24]* i7[19])∧(i69[24] + -1* 0)∧(i4[24]* i4[19]))

(24) -> (23), if ((i4[24]* i4[23])∧(i69[24] + -1* i69[23])∧(i7[24]* i7[23]))

(25) -> (22), if ((i7[25]* i7[22])∧(i7[25]* 0)∧(i4[25]* i4[22]))

(25) -> (26), if ((i4[25]* i4[26])∧(i7[25]* i7[26])∧(i7[25]* i58[26]))

(26) -> (27), if ((i7[26]* i7[27])∧(i58[26] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[26]* i4[27])∧(i58[26]* i58[27]))

(27) -> (22), if ((i7[27]* i7[22])∧(i58[27] + -1* 0)∧(i4[27]* i4[22]))

(27) -> (26), if ((i4[27]* i4[26])∧(i58[27] + -1* i58[26])∧(i7[27]* i7[26]))

(28) -> (25), if ((i7[28]* i7[25])∧(i4[28]* i4[25])∧(i7[28]* 0))

(28) -> (29), if ((i7[28]* i47[29])∧(i4[28]* i4[29])∧(i7[28]* i7[29]))

(29) -> (30), if ((i7[29]* i7[30])∧(i47[29] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[29]* i4[30])∧(i47[29]* i47[30]))

(30) -> (25), if ((i4[30]* i4[25])∧(i47[30] + -1* 0)∧(i7[30]* i7[25]))

(30) -> (29), if ((i7[30]* i7[29])∧(i47[30] + -1* i47[29])∧(i4[30]* i4[29]))

(31) -> (28), if ((i7[31]* i7[28])∧(i7[31]* 0)∧(i4[31]* i4[28]))

(31) -> (32), if ((i7[31]* i32[32])∧(i4[31]* i4[32])∧(i7[31]* i7[32]))

(32) -> (33), if ((i7[32]* i7[33])∧(i4[32]* i4[33])∧(i32[32]* i32[33])∧(i32[32] > 0* TRUE))

(33) -> (28), if ((i32[33] + -1* 0)∧(i7[33]* i7[28])∧(i4[33]* i4[28]))

(33) -> (32), if ((i4[33]* i4[32])∧(i32[33] + -1* i32[32])∧(i7[33]* i7[32]))

(34) -> (35), if ((i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100* TRUE)∧(i7[34]* i7[35])∧(i4[34]* i4[35]))

(35) -> (31), if ((i7[35]* 0)∧(i4[35]* i4[31])∧(i7[35]* i7[31]))

(35) -> (38), if ((i4[35]* i4[38])∧(i7[35]* i22[38])∧(i7[35]* i7[38]))

(36) -> (37), if ((i4[36]* i4[37])∧(i4[36] > 0 && i4[36] < 100* TRUE))

(37) -> (31), if ((i4[37]* 0)∧(i4[37]* i7[31])∧(i4[37]* i4[31]))

(37) -> (38), if ((i4[37]* i22[38])∧(i4[37]* i7[38])∧(i4[37]* i4[38]))

(38) -> (39), if ((i22[38]* i22[39])∧(i22[38] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[38]* i7[39])∧(i4[38]* i4[39]))

(39) -> (31), if ((i22[39] + -1* 0)∧(i4[39]* i4[31])∧(i7[39]* i7[31]))

(39) -> (38), if ((i7[39]* i7[38])∧(i4[39]* i4[38])∧(i22[39] + -1* i22[38]))

(40) -> (41), if ((i7[40]* i7[41])∧(i4[40]* i4[41])∧(i7[40] >= 100 && i4[40] > 0* TRUE))

(41) -> (36), if ((i4[41] - 1* i4[36]))

(41) -> (42), if ((i4[41] - 1* i4[42]))

(42) -> (43), if ((i4[42]* i4[43])∧(i4[42] >= 100* TRUE))

(43) -> (36), if ((i4[43] - 1* i4[36]))

(43) -> (42), if ((i4[43] - 1* i4[42]))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

### (11) IDPNonInfProof (SOUND transformation)

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 LOAD792(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD83(i4, +(i7, 1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[1], i7[1], 0) → LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1]), LOAD792(i4[0], i7[0], 0) → LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1)), LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (1) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (2) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(3)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (3) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(4)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (4) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(5)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (5) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(6)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain COND_LOAD792(TRUE, i4[3], i7[3], i149[3]) → LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1)), LOAD792(i4[0], i7[0], 0) → LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1)), LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (7) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (8) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(9)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (9) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(10)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (10) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(11)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (11) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(12)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧0 ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[1], i7[1], 0) → LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1]), LOAD792(i4[0], i7[0], 0) → LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1)), LOAD83(i4[40], i7[40]) → COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (13) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (14) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(15)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (15) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(16)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (16) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(17)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (17) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(18)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain COND_LOAD792(TRUE, i4[3], i7[3], i149[3]) → LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1)), LOAD792(i4[0], i7[0], 0) → LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1)), LOAD83(i4[40], i7[40]) → COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (19) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (20) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(21)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (21) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(22)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (22) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(23)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (23) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(24)    (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧0 ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD740(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD792(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[1], i7[1], 0) → LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1]), LOAD792(i4[0], i7[0], 0) → LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (25) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (26) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(27)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (27) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(28)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (28) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(29)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (29) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(30)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[1], i7[1], 0) → LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1]), LOAD792(i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) → COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (31) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (32) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(33)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (33) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(34)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (34) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(35)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (35) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(36)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD792(i4, i7, i149) → COND_LOAD792(>(i149, 0), i4, i7, i149) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD792(i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) → COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]), COND_LOAD792(TRUE, i4[3], i7[3], i149[3]) → LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (37) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (38) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(39)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_138 + (-1)Bound*bni_138] + [bni_138]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_139] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (39) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(40)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_138 + (-1)Bound*bni_138] + [bni_138]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_139] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (40) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(41)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_138 + (-1)Bound*bni_138] + [bni_138]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_139] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (41) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(42)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_138] = 0∧[(-1)bni_138 + (-1)Bound*bni_138] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_139] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (42) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(43)    (i149[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_138] = 0∧[(-1)bni_138 + (-1)Bound*bni_138] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_139] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD792(TRUE, i4, i7, i149) → LOAD792(i4, i7, +(i149, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD792(i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) → COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]), COND_LOAD792(TRUE, i4[3], i7[3], i149[3]) → LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1)), LOAD792(i4[0], i7[0], 0) → LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (44) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (45) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(46)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] + [bni_140]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (46) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(47)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] + [bni_140]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (47) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(48)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] + [bni_140]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (48) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(49)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_140] = 0∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (49) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(50)    (i149[2] ≥ 0∧i149[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_140] = 0∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD792(i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) → COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]), COND_LOAD792(TRUE, i4[3], i7[3], i149[3]) → LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1)), LOAD792(i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) → COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (51) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (52) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(53)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] + [bni_140]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (53) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(54)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] + [bni_140]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (54) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(55)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] + [bni_140]i4[2] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (55) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(56)    (i149[2] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_140] = 0∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (56) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(57)    (i149[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_140] = 0∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD688(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD740(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[4], i7[4], 0) → LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4]), LOAD740(i4[1], i7[1], 0) → LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (58) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (59) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(60)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (60) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(61)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (61) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(62)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (62) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(63)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[4], i7[4], 0) → LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4]), LOAD740(i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) → COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (64) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (65) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(66)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (66) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(67)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (67) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(68)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (68) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(69)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD740(i4, i7, i139) → COND_LOAD740(>(i139, 0), i4, i7, i139) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) → COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]), COND_LOAD740(TRUE, i4[6], i7[6], i139[6]) → LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (70) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (71) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(72)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_144 + (-1)Bound*bni_144] + [bni_144]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_145] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (72) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(73)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_144 + (-1)Bound*bni_144] + [bni_144]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_145] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (73) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(74)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_144 + (-1)Bound*bni_144] + [bni_144]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_145] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (74) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(75)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_144] = 0∧[(-1)bni_144 + (-1)Bound*bni_144] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_145] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (75) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(76)    (i139[5] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_144] = 0∧[(-1)bni_144 + (-1)Bound*bni_144] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_145] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD740(TRUE, i4, i7, i139) → LOAD740(i4, i7, +(i139, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) → COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]), COND_LOAD740(TRUE, i4[6], i7[6], i139[6]) → LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1)), LOAD740(i4[1], i7[1], 0) → LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (77) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (78) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(79)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] + [bni_146]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (79) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(80)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] + [bni_146]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (80) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(81)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] + [bni_146]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (81) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(82)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_146] = 0∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (82) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(83)    (i139[5] ≥ 0∧i139[5] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_146] = 0∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD740(i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) → COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]), COND_LOAD740(TRUE, i4[6], i7[6], i139[6]) → LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1)), LOAD740(i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) → COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (84) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (85) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(86)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] + [bni_146]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (86) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(87)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] + [bni_146]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (87) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(88)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] + [bni_146]i4[5] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (88) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(89)    (i139[5] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_146] = 0∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (89) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(90)    (i139[5] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_146] = 0∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD635(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD688(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[7], i7[7], 0) → LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7]), LOAD688(i4[4], i7[4], 0) → LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (91) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (92) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(93)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (93) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(94)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (94) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(95)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (95) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(96)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[7], i7[7], 0) → LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7]), LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (97) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (98) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(99)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (99) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(100)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (100) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(101)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (101) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(102)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD688(i4, i7, i126) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126, 0), i4, i7, i126) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]), COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (103) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (104) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(105)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_150 + (-1)Bound*bni_150] + [bni_150]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_151] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (105) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(106)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_150 + (-1)Bound*bni_150] + [bni_150]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_151] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (106) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(107)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_150 + (-1)Bound*bni_150] + [bni_150]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_151] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (107) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(108)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_150] = 0∧[(-1)bni_150 + (-1)Bound*bni_150] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_151] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (108) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(109)    (i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_150] = 0∧[(-1)bni_150 + (-1)Bound*bni_150] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_151] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4, i7, i126) → LOAD688(i4, i7, +(i126, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]), COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)), LOAD688(i4[4], i7[4], 0) → LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (110) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (111) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(112)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] + [bni_152]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (112) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(113)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] + [bni_152]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (113) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(114)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] + [bni_152]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (114) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(115)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_152] = 0∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (115) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(116)    (i126[8] ≥ 0∧i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_152] = 0∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]), COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)), LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (117) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (118) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(119)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] + [bni_152]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (119) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(120)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] + [bni_152]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (120) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(121)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] + [bni_152]i4[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (121) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(122)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_152] = 0∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (122) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(123)    (i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_152] = 0∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD578(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD635(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[10], i7[10], 0) → LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10]), LOAD635(i4[7], i7[7], 0) → LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (124) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (125) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(126)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (126) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(127)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (127) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(128)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (128) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(129)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[10], i7[10], 0) → LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10]), LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (130) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (131) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(132)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (132) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(133)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (133) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(134)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (134) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(135)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD635(i4, i7, i118) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118, 0), i4, i7, i118) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]), COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (136) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (137) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(138)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_156 + (-1)Bound*bni_156] + [bni_156]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_157] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (138) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(139)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_156 + (-1)Bound*bni_156] + [bni_156]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_157] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (139) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(140)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_156 + (-1)Bound*bni_156] + [bni_156]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_157] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (140) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(141)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_156] = 0∧[(-1)bni_156 + (-1)Bound*bni_156] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_157] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (141) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(142)    (i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_156] = 0∧[(-1)bni_156 + (-1)Bound*bni_156] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_157] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4, i7, i118) → LOAD635(i4, i7, +(i118, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]), COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)), LOAD635(i4[7], i7[7], 0) → LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (143) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (144) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(145)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] + [bni_158]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (145) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(146)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] + [bni_158]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (146) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(147)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] + [bni_158]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (147) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(148)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_158] = 0∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (148) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(149)    (i118[11] ≥ 0∧i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_158] = 0∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]), COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)), LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (150) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (151) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(152)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] + [bni_158]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (152) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(153)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] + [bni_158]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (153) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(154)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] + [bni_158]i4[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (154) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(155)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_158] = 0∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (155) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(156)    (i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_158] = 0∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD527(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD578(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[13], i7[13], 0) → LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13]), LOAD578(i4[10], i7[10], 0) → LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (157) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (158) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(159)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (159) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(160)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (160) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(161)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (161) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(162)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[13], i7[13], 0) → LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13]), LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (163) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (164) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(165)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (165) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(166)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (166) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(167)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (167) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(168)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD578(i4, i7, i106) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106, 0), i4, i7, i106) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]), COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (169) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (170) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(171)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_162 + (-1)Bound*bni_162] + [bni_162]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_163] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (171) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(172)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_162 + (-1)Bound*bni_162] + [bni_162]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_163] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (172) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(173)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_162 + (-1)Bound*bni_162] + [bni_162]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_163] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (173) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(174)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_162] = 0∧[(-1)bni_162 + (-1)Bound*bni_162] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_163] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (174) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(175)    (i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_162] = 0∧[(-1)bni_162 + (-1)Bound*bni_162] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_163] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4, i7, i106) → LOAD578(i4, i7, +(i106, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]), COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)), LOAD578(i4[10], i7[10], 0) → LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (176) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (177) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(178)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] + [bni_164]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (178) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(179)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] + [bni_164]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (179) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(180)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] + [bni_164]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (180) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(181)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_164] = 0∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (181) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(182)    (i106[14] ≥ 0∧i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_164] = 0∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]), COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)), LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (183) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (184) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(185)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] + [bni_164]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (185) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(186)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] + [bni_164]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (186) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(187)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] + [bni_164]i4[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (187) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(188)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_164] = 0∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (188) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(189)    (i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_164] = 0∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD472(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD527(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[16], i7[16], 0) → LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16]), LOAD527(i4[13], i7[13], 0) → LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (190) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (191) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(192)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (192) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(193)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (193) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(194)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (194) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(195)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[16], i7[16], 0) → LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16]), LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (196) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (197) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(198)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (198) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(199)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (199) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(200)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (200) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(201)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD527(i4, i7, i94) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94, 0), i4, i7, i94) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]), COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (202) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (203) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(204)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_168 + (-1)Bound*bni_168] + [bni_168]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_169] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (204) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(205)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_168 + (-1)Bound*bni_168] + [bni_168]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_169] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (205) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(206)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_168 + (-1)Bound*bni_168] + [bni_168]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_169] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (206) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(207)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_168] = 0∧[(-1)bni_168 + (-1)Bound*bni_168] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_169] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (207) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(208)    (i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_168] = 0∧[(-1)bni_168 + (-1)Bound*bni_168] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_169] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4, i7, i94) → LOAD527(i4, i7, +(i94, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]), COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)), LOAD527(i4[13], i7[13], 0) → LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (209) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (210) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(211)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] + [bni_170]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (211) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(212)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] + [bni_170]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (212) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(213)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] + [bni_170]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (213) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(214)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_170] = 0∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (214) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(215)    (i94[17] ≥ 0∧i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_170] = 0∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]), COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)), LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (216) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (217) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(218)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] + [bni_170]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (218) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(219)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] + [bni_170]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (219) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(220)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] + [bni_170]i4[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (220) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(221)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_170] = 0∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (221) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(222)    (i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_170] = 0∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD404(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD472(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[19], i7[19], 0) → LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19]), LOAD472(i4[16], i7[16], 0) → LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (223) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (224) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(225)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (225) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(226)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (226) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(227)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (227) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(228)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[19], i7[19], 0) → LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19]), LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (229) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (230) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(231)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (231) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(232)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (232) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(233)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (233) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(234)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD472(i4, i7, i83) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83, 0), i4, i7, i83) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]), COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (235) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (236) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(237)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_174 + (-1)Bound*bni_174] + [bni_174]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_175] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (237) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(238)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_174 + (-1)Bound*bni_174] + [bni_174]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_175] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (238) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(239)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_174 + (-1)Bound*bni_174] + [bni_174]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_175] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (239) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(240)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_174] = 0∧[(-1)bni_174 + (-1)Bound*bni_174] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_175] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (240) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(241)    (i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_174] = 0∧[(-1)bni_174 + (-1)Bound*bni_174] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_175] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4, i7, i83) → LOAD472(i4, i7, +(i83, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]), COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)), LOAD472(i4[16], i7[16], 0) → LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (242) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (243) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(244)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] + [bni_176]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (244) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(245)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] + [bni_176]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (245) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(246)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] + [bni_176]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (246) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(247)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_176] = 0∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (247) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(248)    (i83[20] ≥ 0∧i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_176] = 0∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]), COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)), LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (249) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (250) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(251)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] + [bni_176]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (251) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(252)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] + [bni_176]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (252) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(253)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] + [bni_176]i4[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (253) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(254)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_176] = 0∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (254) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(255)    (i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_176] = 0∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD348(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD404(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[22], i7[22], 0) → LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22]), LOAD404(i4[19], i7[19], 0) → LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (256) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (257) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(258)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (258) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(259)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (259) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(260)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (260) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(261)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[22], i7[22], 0) → LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22]), LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (262) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (263) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(264)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (264) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(265)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (265) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(266)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (266) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(267)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD404(i4, i7, i69) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69, 0), i4, i7, i69) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]), COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (268) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (269) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(270)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_180 + (-1)Bound*bni_180] + [bni_180]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_181] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (270) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(271)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_180 + (-1)Bound*bni_180] + [bni_180]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_181] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (271) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(272)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_180 + (-1)Bound*bni_180] + [bni_180]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_181] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (272) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(273)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_180] = 0∧[(-1)bni_180 + (-1)Bound*bni_180] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_181] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (273) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(274)    (i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_180] = 0∧[(-1)bni_180 + (-1)Bound*bni_180] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_181] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4, i7, i69) → LOAD404(i4, i7, +(i69, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]), COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)), LOAD404(i4[19], i7[19], 0) → LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (275) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (276) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(277)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] + [bni_182]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (277) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(278)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] + [bni_182]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (278) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(279)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] + [bni_182]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (279) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(280)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_182] = 0∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (280) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(281)    (i69[23] ≥ 0∧i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_182] = 0∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]), COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)), LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (282) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (283) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(284)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] + [bni_182]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (284) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(285)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] + [bni_182]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (285) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(286)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] + [bni_182]i4[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (286) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(287)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_182] = 0∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (287) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(288)    (i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_182] = 0∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD290(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD348(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[25], i7[25], 0) → LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25]), LOAD348(i4[22], i7[22], 0) → LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (289) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (290) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(291)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (291) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(292)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (292) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(293)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (293) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(294)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[25], i7[25], 0) → LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25]), LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (295) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (296) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(297)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (297) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(298)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (298) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(299)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (299) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(300)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD348(i4, i7, i58) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58, 0), i4, i7, i58) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]), COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (301) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (302) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(303)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_186 + (-1)Bound*bni_186] + [bni_186]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_187] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (303) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(304)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_186 + (-1)Bound*bni_186] + [bni_186]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_187] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (304) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(305)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_186 + (-1)Bound*bni_186] + [bni_186]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_187] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (305) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(306)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_186] = 0∧[(-1)bni_186 + (-1)Bound*bni_186] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_187] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (306) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(307)    (i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_186] = 0∧[(-1)bni_186 + (-1)Bound*bni_186] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_187] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4, i7, i58) → LOAD348(i4, i7, +(i58, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]), COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)), LOAD348(i4[22], i7[22], 0) → LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (308) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (309) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(310)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] + [bni_188]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (310) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(311)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] + [bni_188]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (311) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(312)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] + [bni_188]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (312) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(313)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_188] = 0∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (313) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(314)    (i58[26] ≥ 0∧i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_188] = 0∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]), COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)), LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (315) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (316) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(317)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] + [bni_188]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (317) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(318)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] + [bni_188]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (318) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(319)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] + [bni_188]i4[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (319) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(320)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_188] = 0∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (320) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(321)    (i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_188] = 0∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD230(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD290(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[28], i7[28], 0) → LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28]), LOAD290(i4[25], i7[25], 0) → LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (322) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (323) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(324)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (324) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(325)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (325) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(326)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (326) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(327)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[28], i7[28], 0) → LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28]), LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (328) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (329) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(330)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (330) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(331)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (331) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(332)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (332) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(333)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD290(i4, i7, i47) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47, 0), i4, i7, i47) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]), COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (334) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (335) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(336)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_192 + (-1)Bound*bni_192] + [bni_192]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_193] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (336) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(337)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_192 + (-1)Bound*bni_192] + [bni_192]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_193] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (337) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(338)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_192 + (-1)Bound*bni_192] + [bni_192]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_193] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (338) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(339)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_192] = 0∧[(-1)bni_192 + (-1)Bound*bni_192] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_193] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (339) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(340)    (i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_192] = 0∧[(-1)bni_192 + (-1)Bound*bni_192] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_193] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4, i7, i47) → LOAD290(i4, i7, +(i47, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]), COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)), LOAD290(i4[25], i7[25], 0) → LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (341) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (342) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(343)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] + [bni_194]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (343) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(344)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] + [bni_194]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (344) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(345)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] + [bni_194]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (345) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(346)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_194] = 0∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (346) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(347)    (i47[29] ≥ 0∧i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_194] = 0∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]), COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)), LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (348) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (349) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(350)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] + [bni_194]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (350) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(351)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] + [bni_194]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (351) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(352)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] + [bni_194]i4[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (352) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(353)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_194] = 0∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (353) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(354)    (i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_194] = 0∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD173(i4, i7, 0) → LOAD230(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[31], i7[31], 0) → LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31]), LOAD230(i4[28], i7[28], 0) → LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (355) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (356) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(357)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (357) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(358)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (358) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(359)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (359) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(360)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[31], i7[31], 0) → LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31]), LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (361) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (362) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(363)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (363) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(364)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (364) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(365)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (365) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(366)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD230(i4, i7, i32) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32, 0), i4, i7, i32) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]), COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (367) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (368) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(369)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_198 + (-1)Bound*bni_198] + [bni_198]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_199] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (369) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(370)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_198 + (-1)Bound*bni_198] + [bni_198]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_199] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (370) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(371)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_198 + (-1)Bound*bni_198] + [bni_198]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_199] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (371) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(372)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_198] = 0∧[(-1)bni_198 + (-1)Bound*bni_198] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_199] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (372) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(373)    (i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_198] = 0∧[(-1)bni_198 + (-1)Bound*bni_198] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_199] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4, i7, i32) → LOAD230(i4, i7, +(i32, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]), COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)), LOAD230(i4[28], i7[28], 0) → LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (374) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (375) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(376)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] + [bni_200]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (376) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(377)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] + [bni_200]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (377) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(378)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] + [bni_200]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (378) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(379)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_200] = 0∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (379) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(380)    (i32[32] ≥ 0∧i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_200] = 0∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]), COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)), LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (381) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (382) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(383)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] + [bni_200]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (383) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(384)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] + [bni_200]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (384) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(385)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] + [bni_200]i4[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (385) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(386)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_200] = 0∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (386) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(387)    (i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_200] = 0∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD83(i4, i7) → COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7, 0), <(i7, 100)), i4, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34]), COND_LOAD83(TRUE, i4[35], i7[35]) → LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (388) using rules (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (389) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(390)    (i7[34] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i7[34] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_202 + (-1)Bound*bni_202] + [bni_202]i4[34] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_203] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (390) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(391)    (i7[34] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i7[34] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_202 + (-1)Bound*bni_202] + [bni_202]i4[34] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_203] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (391) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(392)    (i7[34] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i7[34] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_202 + (-1)Bound*bni_202] + [bni_202]i4[34] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_203] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (392) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(393)    (i7[34] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i7[34] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34])), ≥)∧[bni_202] = 0∧[(-1)bni_202 + (-1)Bound*bni_202] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_203] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (393) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(394)    (i7[34] ≥ 0∧[98] + [-1]i7[34] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34])), ≥)∧[bni_202] = 0∧[(-1)bni_202 + (-1)Bound*bni_202] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_203] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD83(TRUE, i4, i7) → LOAD173(i4, i7, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain COND_LOAD83(TRUE, i4[35], i7[35]) → LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35]), LOAD173(i4[31], i7[31], 0) → LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (395) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (396) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(397)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (397) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(398)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (398) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(399)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (399) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(400)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain COND_LOAD83(TRUE, i4[35], i7[35]) → LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35]), LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (401) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (402) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(403)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (403) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(404)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (404) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(405)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (405) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(406)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD54(i4) → COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4, 0), <(i4, 100)), i4) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD54(i4[36]) → COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4[36], 0), <(i4[36], 100)), i4[36]), COND_LOAD54(TRUE, i4[37]) → LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (407) using rules (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (408) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(409)    (i4[36] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i4[36] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4[36], 0), <(i4[36], 100)), i4[36])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_206 + (-1)Bound*bni_206] + [bni_206]i4[36] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_207] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (409) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(410)    (i4[36] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i4[36] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4[36], 0), <(i4[36], 100)), i4[36])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_206 + (-1)Bound*bni_206] + [bni_206]i4[36] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_207] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (410) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(411)    (i4[36] + [-1] ≥ 0∧[99] + [-1]i4[36] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4[36], 0), <(i4[36], 100)), i4[36])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_206 + (-1)Bound*bni_206] + [bni_206]i4[36] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_207] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (411) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(412)    (i4[36] ≥ 0∧[98] + [-1]i4[36] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4[36], 0), <(i4[36], 100)), i4[36])), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_206] + [bni_206]i4[36] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_207] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD54(TRUE, i4) → LOAD173(i4, i4, i4) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain COND_LOAD54(TRUE, i4[37]) → LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37]), LOAD173(i4[31], i7[31], 0) → LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (413) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (414) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(415)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (415) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(416)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (416) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(417)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain COND_LOAD54(TRUE, i4[37]) → LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37]), LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (418) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (419) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(420)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (420) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(421)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (421) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(422)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (422) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(423)    ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD173(i4, i7, i22) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22, 0), i4, i7, i22) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]), COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (424) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (425) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(426)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_210 + (-1)Bound*bni_210] + [bni_210]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_211] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (426) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(427)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_210 + (-1)Bound*bni_210] + [bni_210]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_211] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (427) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(428)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_210 + (-1)Bound*bni_210] + [bni_210]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_211] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (428) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(429)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_210] = 0∧[(-1)bni_210 + (-1)Bound*bni_210] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_211] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (429) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(430)    (i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_210] = 0∧[(-1)bni_210 + (-1)Bound*bni_210] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_211] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4, i7, i22) → LOAD173(i4, i7, +(i22, -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]), COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)), LOAD173(i4[31], i7[31], 0) → LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (431) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (432) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(433)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] + [bni_212]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (433) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(434)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] + [bni_212]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (434) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(435)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] + [bni_212]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (435) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(436)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_212] = 0∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (436) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(437)    (i22[38] ≥ 0∧i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_212] = 0∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]), COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)), LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (438) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (439) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(440)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] + [bni_212]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (440) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(441)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] + [bni_212]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (441) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(442)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] + [bni_212]i4[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (442) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(443)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_212] = 0∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (443) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(444)    (i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_212] = 0∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD83(i4, i7) → COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7, 100), >(i4, 0)), i4, i7) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD83(i4[40], i7[40]) → COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40]), COND_LOAD831(TRUE, i4[41], i7[41]) → LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (445) using rules (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (446) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(447)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_214 + (-1)Bound*bni_214] + [bni_214]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_215] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (447) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(448)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_214 + (-1)Bound*bni_214] + [bni_214]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_215] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (448) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(449)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_214 + (-1)Bound*bni_214] + [bni_214]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_215] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (449) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(450)    (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_214 + (-1)Bound*bni_214] + [bni_214]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_215] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (450) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(451)    (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40])), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_214] + [bni_214]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_215] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD831(TRUE, i4, i7) → LOAD54(-(i4, 1)) the following chains were created:

We simplified constraint (452) using rules (III), (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (453) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(454)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (454) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(455)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (455) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(456)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (456) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(457)    (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (457) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(458)    (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (459) using rules (III), (IV), (IDP_BOOLEAN) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (460) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(461)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (461) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(462)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (462) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(463)    (i7[40] + [-100] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (463) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(464)    (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_216 + (-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (464) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(465)    (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD54(i4) → COND_LOAD541(>=(i4, 100), i4) the following chains were created:

We simplified constraint (466) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (467) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(468)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD541(>=(i4[42], 100), i4[42])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_218 + (-1)Bound*bni_218] + [bni_218]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_219] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (468) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(469)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD541(>=(i4[42], 100), i4[42])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_218 + (-1)Bound*bni_218] + [bni_218]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_219] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (469) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(470)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD541(>=(i4[42], 100), i4[42])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_218 + (-1)Bound*bni_218] + [bni_218]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_219] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (470) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(471)    (i4[42] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD541(>=(i4[42], 100), i4[42])), ≥)∧[(99)bni_218 + (-1)Bound*bni_218] + [bni_218]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_219] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD541(TRUE, i4) → LOAD54(-(i4, 1)) the following chains were created:

We simplified constraint (472) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (473) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(474)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (474) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(475)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (475) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(476)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (476) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(477)    (i4[42] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(99)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (478) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (479) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(480)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (480) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(481)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (481) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(482)    (i4[42] + [-100] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (482) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(483)    (i4[42] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(99)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

To summarize, we get the following constraints P for the following pairs.
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)
• (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧0 ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)
• (i149[3] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD83(i4[0], +(i7[0], 1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧0 ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_135] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[1], i7[1], i7[1])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_137] ≥ 0)

• (i149[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD792(>(i149[2], 0), i4[2], i7[2], i149[2])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_138] = 0∧[(-1)bni_138 + (-1)Bound*bni_138] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_139] ≥ 0)

• (i149[2] ≥ 0∧i149[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_140] = 0∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)
• (i149[2] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD792(i4[3], i7[3], +(i149[3], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_140] = 0∧[(-1)bni_140 + (-1)Bound*bni_140] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_141] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_143] ≥ 0)

• (i139[5] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD740(>(i139[5], 0), i4[5], i7[5], i139[5])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_144] = 0∧[(-1)bni_144 + (-1)Bound*bni_144] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_145] ≥ 0)

• (i139[5] ≥ 0∧i139[5] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_146] = 0∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)
• (i139[5] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD740(i4[6], i7[6], +(i139[6], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_146] = 0∧[(-1)bni_146 + (-1)Bound*bni_146] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_147] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_149] ≥ 0)

• (i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_150] = 0∧[(-1)bni_150 + (-1)Bound*bni_150] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_151] ≥ 0)

• (i126[8] ≥ 0∧i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_152] = 0∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)
• (i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_152] = 0∧[(-1)bni_152 + (-1)Bound*bni_152] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_153] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_155] ≥ 0)

• (i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_156] = 0∧[(-1)bni_156 + (-1)Bound*bni_156] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_157] ≥ 0)

• (i118[11] ≥ 0∧i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_158] = 0∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)
• (i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_158] = 0∧[(-1)bni_158 + (-1)Bound*bni_158] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_159] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_161] ≥ 0)

• (i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_162] = 0∧[(-1)bni_162 + (-1)Bound*bni_162] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_163] ≥ 0)

• (i106[14] ≥ 0∧i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_164] = 0∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)
• (i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_164] = 0∧[(-1)bni_164 + (-1)Bound*bni_164] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_165] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_167] ≥ 0)

• (i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_168] = 0∧[(-1)bni_168 + (-1)Bound*bni_168] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_169] ≥ 0)

• (i94[17] ≥ 0∧i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_170] = 0∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)
• (i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_170] = 0∧[(-1)bni_170 + (-1)Bound*bni_170] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_171] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_173] ≥ 0)

• (i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_174] = 0∧[(-1)bni_174 + (-1)Bound*bni_174] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_175] ≥ 0)

• (i83[20] ≥ 0∧i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_176] = 0∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)
• (i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_176] = 0∧[(-1)bni_176 + (-1)Bound*bni_176] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_177] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_179] ≥ 0)

• (i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_180] = 0∧[(-1)bni_180 + (-1)Bound*bni_180] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_181] ≥ 0)

• (i69[23] ≥ 0∧i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_182] = 0∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)
• (i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_182] = 0∧[(-1)bni_182 + (-1)Bound*bni_182] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_183] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_185] ≥ 0)

• (i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_186] = 0∧[(-1)bni_186 + (-1)Bound*bni_186] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_187] ≥ 0)

• (i58[26] ≥ 0∧i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_188] = 0∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)
• (i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_188] = 0∧[(-1)bni_188 + (-1)Bound*bni_188] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_189] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_191] ≥ 0)

• (i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_192] = 0∧[(-1)bni_192 + (-1)Bound*bni_192] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_193] ≥ 0)

• (i47[29] ≥ 0∧i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_194] = 0∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)
• (i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_194] = 0∧[(-1)bni_194 + (-1)Bound*bni_194] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_195] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_197] ≥ 0)

• (i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_198] = 0∧[(-1)bni_198 + (-1)Bound*bni_198] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_199] ≥ 0)

• (i32[32] ≥ 0∧i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_200] = 0∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)
• (i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_200] = 0∧[(-1)bni_200 + (-1)Bound*bni_200] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_201] ≥ 0)

• (i7[34] ≥ 0∧[98] + [-1]i7[34] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD83(&&(>(i7[34], 0), <(i7[34], 100)), i4[34], i7[34])), ≥)∧[bni_202] = 0∧[(-1)bni_202 + (-1)Bound*bni_202] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_203] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[35], i7[35], i7[35])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_205] ≥ 0)

• (i4[36] ≥ 0∧[98] + [-1]i4[36] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD54(&&(>(i4[36], 0), <(i4[36], 100)), i4[36])), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_206] + [bni_206]i4[36] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_207] ≥ 0)

• ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)
• ((UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[37], i4[37], i4[37])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_209] ≥ 0)

• (i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_210] = 0∧[(-1)bni_210 + (-1)Bound*bni_210] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_211] ≥ 0)

• (i22[38] ≥ 0∧i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_212] = 0∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)
• (i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧0 = 0∧[bni_212] = 0∧[(-1)bni_212 + (-1)Bound*bni_212] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_213] ≥ 0)

• (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD831(&&(>=(i7[40], 100), >(i4[40], 0)), i4[40], i7[40])), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_214] + [bni_214]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_215] ≥ 0)

• (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)
• (i7[40] ≥ 0∧i4[40] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[41], 1))), ≥)∧[(-1)Bound*bni_216] + [bni_216]i4[40] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_217] ≥ 0)

• (i4[42] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD541(>=(i4[42], 100), i4[42])), ≥)∧[(99)bni_218 + (-1)Bound*bni_218] + [bni_218]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_219] ≥ 0)

• (i4[42] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(99)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)
• (i4[42] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD54(-(i4[43], 1))), ≥)∧[(99)bni_220 + (-1)Bound*bni_220] + [bni_220]i4[42] ≥ 0∧[1 + (-1)bso_221] ≥ 0)

The constraints for P> respective Pbound 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 Pbound.
Using the following integer polynomial ordering the resulting constraints can be solved
Polynomial interpretation over integers[POLO]:

POL(TRUE) = [3]
POL(FALSE) = 0
POL(LOAD792(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(0) = 0
POL(LOAD83(x1, x2)) = [-1] + x1
POL(+(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2
POL(1) = [1]
POL(LOAD740(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD792(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(>(x1, x2)) = [-1]
POL(-1) = [-1]
POL(LOAD688(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD740(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD635(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD688(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD578(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD635(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD527(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD578(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD472(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD527(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD404(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD472(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD348(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD404(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD290(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD348(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD230(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD290(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(LOAD173(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x1
POL(COND_LOAD230(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(COND_LOAD83(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x2
POL(&&(x1, x2)) = [-1]
POL(<(x1, x2)) = [-1]
POL(100) = [100]
POL(COND_LOAD54(x1, x2)) = [-1] + x2
POL(COND_LOAD173(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = [-1] + x2
POL(COND_LOAD831(x1, x2, x3)) = [-1] + x2
POL(>=(x1, x2)) = [-1]
POL(-(x1, x2)) = x1 + [-1]x2
POL(COND_LOAD541(x1, x2)) = [-1] + x2

The following pairs are in P>:

The following pairs are in Pbound:

The following pairs are in P:

At least the following rules have been oriented under context sensitive arithmetic replacement:

TRUE1&&(TRUE, TRUE)1
FALSE1&&(TRUE, FALSE)1
FALSE1&&(FALSE, TRUE)1
FALSE1&&(FALSE, FALSE)1

### (13) 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, Boolean

R is empty.

The integer pair graph contains the following rules and edges:
(34): LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100, i4[34], i7[34])
(40): LOAD83(i4[40], i7[40]) → COND_LOAD831(i7[40] >= 100 && i4[40] > 0, i4[40], i7[40])

(1) -> (0), if ((i7[1]* i7[0])∧(i4[1]* i4[0])∧(i7[1]* 0))

(3) -> (0), if ((i7[3]* i7[0])∧(i4[3]* i4[0])∧(i149[3] + -1* 0))

(4) -> (1), if ((i4[4]* i4[1])∧(i7[4]* i7[1])∧(i7[4]* 0))

(6) -> (1), if ((i7[6]* i7[1])∧(i139[6] + -1* 0)∧(i4[6]* i4[1]))

(1) -> (2), if ((i7[1]* i7[2])∧(i7[1]* i149[2])∧(i4[1]* i4[2]))

(3) -> (2), if ((i149[3] + -1* i149[2])∧(i7[3]* i7[2])∧(i4[3]* i4[2]))

(2) -> (3), if ((i7[2]* i7[3])∧(i149[2]* i149[3])∧(i4[2]* i4[3])∧(i149[2] > 0* TRUE))

(7) -> (4), if ((i7[7]* 0)∧(i4[7]* i4[4])∧(i7[7]* i7[4]))

(9) -> (4), if ((i126[9] + -1* 0)∧(i7[9]* i7[4])∧(i4[9]* i4[4]))

(4) -> (5), if ((i4[4]* i4[5])∧(i7[4]* i139[5])∧(i7[4]* i7[5]))

(6) -> (5), if ((i139[6] + -1* i139[5])∧(i7[6]* i7[5])∧(i4[6]* i4[5]))

(5) -> (6), if ((i4[5]* i4[6])∧(i139[5] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[5]* i7[6])∧(i139[5]* i139[6]))

(10) -> (7), if ((i7[10]* 0)∧(i4[10]* i4[7])∧(i7[10]* i7[7]))

(12) -> (7), if ((i4[12]* i4[7])∧(i118[12] + -1* 0)∧(i7[12]* i7[7]))

(7) -> (8), if ((i7[7]* i7[8])∧(i4[7]* i4[8])∧(i7[7]* i126[8]))

(9) -> (8), if ((i7[9]* i7[8])∧(i4[9]* i4[8])∧(i126[9] + -1* i126[8]))

(8) -> (9), if ((i7[8]* i7[9])∧(i4[8]* i4[9])∧(i126[8]* i126[9])∧(i126[8] > 0* TRUE))

(13) -> (10), if ((i7[13]* i7[10])∧(i4[13]* i4[10])∧(i7[13]* 0))

(15) -> (10), if ((i106[15] + -1* 0)∧(i7[15]* i7[10])∧(i4[15]* i4[10]))

(10) -> (11), if ((i7[10]* i118[11])∧(i4[10]* i4[11])∧(i7[10]* i7[11]))

(12) -> (11), if ((i7[12]* i7[11])∧(i4[12]* i4[11])∧(i118[12] + -1* i118[11]))

(11) -> (12), if ((i118[11]* i118[12])∧(i7[11]* i7[12])∧(i118[11] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[11]* i4[12]))

(16) -> (13), if ((i7[16]* i7[13])∧(i4[16]* i4[13])∧(i7[16]* 0))

(18) -> (13), if ((i4[18]* i4[13])∧(i7[18]* i7[13])∧(i94[18] + -1* 0))

(13) -> (14), if ((i7[13]* i106[14])∧(i4[13]* i4[14])∧(i7[13]* i7[14]))

(15) -> (14), if ((i4[15]* i4[14])∧(i7[15]* i7[14])∧(i106[15] + -1* i106[14]))

(14) -> (15), if ((i7[14]* i7[15])∧(i106[14] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[14]* i4[15])∧(i106[14]* i106[15]))

(19) -> (16), if ((i7[19]* i7[16])∧(i4[19]* i4[16])∧(i7[19]* 0))

(21) -> (16), if ((i4[21]* i4[16])∧(i7[21]* i7[16])∧(i83[21] + -1* 0))

(16) -> (17), if ((i7[16]* i7[17])∧(i7[16]* i94[17])∧(i4[16]* i4[17]))

(18) -> (17), if ((i7[18]* i7[17])∧(i94[18] + -1* i94[17])∧(i4[18]* i4[17]))

(17) -> (18), if ((i94[17]* i94[18])∧(i94[17] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[17]* i7[18])∧(i4[17]* i4[18]))

(22) -> (19), if ((i4[22]* i4[19])∧(i7[22]* 0)∧(i7[22]* i7[19]))

(24) -> (19), if ((i7[24]* i7[19])∧(i69[24] + -1* 0)∧(i4[24]* i4[19]))

(19) -> (20), if ((i4[19]* i4[20])∧(i7[19]* i7[20])∧(i7[19]* i83[20]))

(21) -> (20), if ((i83[21] + -1* i83[20])∧(i7[21]* i7[20])∧(i4[21]* i4[20]))

(20) -> (21), if ((i4[20]* i4[21])∧(i83[20]* i83[21])∧(i7[20]* i7[21])∧(i83[20] > 0* TRUE))

(25) -> (22), if ((i7[25]* i7[22])∧(i7[25]* 0)∧(i4[25]* i4[22]))

(27) -> (22), if ((i7[27]* i7[22])∧(i58[27] + -1* 0)∧(i4[27]* i4[22]))

(22) -> (23), if ((i7[22]* i69[23])∧(i7[22]* i7[23])∧(i4[22]* i4[23]))

(24) -> (23), if ((i4[24]* i4[23])∧(i69[24] + -1* i69[23])∧(i7[24]* i7[23]))

(23) -> (24), if ((i69[23] > 0* TRUE)∧(i69[23]* i69[24])∧(i4[23]* i4[24])∧(i7[23]* i7[24]))

(28) -> (25), if ((i7[28]* i7[25])∧(i4[28]* i4[25])∧(i7[28]* 0))

(30) -> (25), if ((i4[30]* i4[25])∧(i47[30] + -1* 0)∧(i7[30]* i7[25]))

(25) -> (26), if ((i4[25]* i4[26])∧(i7[25]* i7[26])∧(i7[25]* i58[26]))

(27) -> (26), if ((i4[27]* i4[26])∧(i58[27] + -1* i58[26])∧(i7[27]* i7[26]))

(26) -> (27), if ((i7[26]* i7[27])∧(i58[26] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[26]* i4[27])∧(i58[26]* i58[27]))

(31) -> (28), if ((i7[31]* i7[28])∧(i7[31]* 0)∧(i4[31]* i4[28]))

(33) -> (28), if ((i32[33] + -1* 0)∧(i7[33]* i7[28])∧(i4[33]* i4[28]))

(28) -> (29), if ((i7[28]* i47[29])∧(i4[28]* i4[29])∧(i7[28]* i7[29]))

(30) -> (29), if ((i7[30]* i7[29])∧(i47[30] + -1* i47[29])∧(i4[30]* i4[29]))

(29) -> (30), if ((i7[29]* i7[30])∧(i47[29] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[29]* i4[30])∧(i47[29]* i47[30]))

(35) -> (31), if ((i7[35]* 0)∧(i4[35]* i4[31])∧(i7[35]* i7[31]))

(37) -> (31), if ((i4[37]* 0)∧(i4[37]* i7[31])∧(i4[37]* i4[31]))

(39) -> (31), if ((i22[39] + -1* 0)∧(i4[39]* i4[31])∧(i7[39]* i7[31]))

(31) -> (32), if ((i7[31]* i32[32])∧(i4[31]* i4[32])∧(i7[31]* i7[32]))

(33) -> (32), if ((i4[33]* i4[32])∧(i32[33] + -1* i32[32])∧(i7[33]* i7[32]))

(32) -> (33), if ((i7[32]* i7[33])∧(i4[32]* i4[33])∧(i32[32]* i32[33])∧(i32[32] > 0* TRUE))

(0) -> (34), if ((i4[0]* i4[34])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[34]))

(34) -> (35), if ((i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100* TRUE)∧(i7[34]* i7[35])∧(i4[34]* i4[35]))

(36) -> (37), if ((i4[36]* i4[37])∧(i4[36] > 0 && i4[36] < 100* TRUE))

(35) -> (38), if ((i4[35]* i4[38])∧(i7[35]* i22[38])∧(i7[35]* i7[38]))

(37) -> (38), if ((i4[37]* i22[38])∧(i4[37]* i7[38])∧(i4[37]* i4[38]))

(39) -> (38), if ((i7[39]* i7[38])∧(i4[39]* i4[38])∧(i22[39] + -1* i22[38]))

(38) -> (39), if ((i22[38]* i22[39])∧(i22[38] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[38]* i7[39])∧(i4[38]* i4[39]))

(0) -> (40), if ((i4[0]* i4[40])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[40]))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

### (14) IDependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 4 less nodes.

### (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, Boolean

R is empty.

The integer pair graph contains the following rules and edges:
(34): LOAD83(i4[34], i7[34]) → COND_LOAD83(i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100, i4[34], i7[34])

(1) -> (0), if ((i7[1]* i7[0])∧(i4[1]* i4[0])∧(i7[1]* 0))

(3) -> (0), if ((i7[3]* i7[0])∧(i4[3]* i4[0])∧(i149[3] + -1* 0))

(4) -> (1), if ((i4[4]* i4[1])∧(i7[4]* i7[1])∧(i7[4]* 0))

(6) -> (1), if ((i7[6]* i7[1])∧(i139[6] + -1* 0)∧(i4[6]* i4[1]))

(1) -> (2), if ((i7[1]* i7[2])∧(i7[1]* i149[2])∧(i4[1]* i4[2]))

(3) -> (2), if ((i149[3] + -1* i149[2])∧(i7[3]* i7[2])∧(i4[3]* i4[2]))

(2) -> (3), if ((i7[2]* i7[3])∧(i149[2]* i149[3])∧(i4[2]* i4[3])∧(i149[2] > 0* TRUE))

(7) -> (4), if ((i7[7]* 0)∧(i4[7]* i4[4])∧(i7[7]* i7[4]))

(9) -> (4), if ((i126[9] + -1* 0)∧(i7[9]* i7[4])∧(i4[9]* i4[4]))

(4) -> (5), if ((i4[4]* i4[5])∧(i7[4]* i139[5])∧(i7[4]* i7[5]))

(6) -> (5), if ((i139[6] + -1* i139[5])∧(i7[6]* i7[5])∧(i4[6]* i4[5]))

(5) -> (6), if ((i4[5]* i4[6])∧(i139[5] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[5]* i7[6])∧(i139[5]* i139[6]))

(10) -> (7), if ((i7[10]* 0)∧(i4[10]* i4[7])∧(i7[10]* i7[7]))

(12) -> (7), if ((i4[12]* i4[7])∧(i118[12] + -1* 0)∧(i7[12]* i7[7]))

(7) -> (8), if ((i7[7]* i7[8])∧(i4[7]* i4[8])∧(i7[7]* i126[8]))

(9) -> (8), if ((i7[9]* i7[8])∧(i4[9]* i4[8])∧(i126[9] + -1* i126[8]))

(8) -> (9), if ((i7[8]* i7[9])∧(i4[8]* i4[9])∧(i126[8]* i126[9])∧(i126[8] > 0* TRUE))

(13) -> (10), if ((i7[13]* i7[10])∧(i4[13]* i4[10])∧(i7[13]* 0))

(15) -> (10), if ((i106[15] + -1* 0)∧(i7[15]* i7[10])∧(i4[15]* i4[10]))

(10) -> (11), if ((i7[10]* i118[11])∧(i4[10]* i4[11])∧(i7[10]* i7[11]))

(12) -> (11), if ((i7[12]* i7[11])∧(i4[12]* i4[11])∧(i118[12] + -1* i118[11]))

(11) -> (12), if ((i118[11]* i118[12])∧(i7[11]* i7[12])∧(i118[11] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[11]* i4[12]))

(16) -> (13), if ((i7[16]* i7[13])∧(i4[16]* i4[13])∧(i7[16]* 0))

(18) -> (13), if ((i4[18]* i4[13])∧(i7[18]* i7[13])∧(i94[18] + -1* 0))

(13) -> (14), if ((i7[13]* i106[14])∧(i4[13]* i4[14])∧(i7[13]* i7[14]))

(15) -> (14), if ((i4[15]* i4[14])∧(i7[15]* i7[14])∧(i106[15] + -1* i106[14]))

(14) -> (15), if ((i7[14]* i7[15])∧(i106[14] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[14]* i4[15])∧(i106[14]* i106[15]))

(19) -> (16), if ((i7[19]* i7[16])∧(i4[19]* i4[16])∧(i7[19]* 0))

(21) -> (16), if ((i4[21]* i4[16])∧(i7[21]* i7[16])∧(i83[21] + -1* 0))

(16) -> (17), if ((i7[16]* i7[17])∧(i7[16]* i94[17])∧(i4[16]* i4[17]))

(18) -> (17), if ((i7[18]* i7[17])∧(i94[18] + -1* i94[17])∧(i4[18]* i4[17]))

(17) -> (18), if ((i94[17]* i94[18])∧(i94[17] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[17]* i7[18])∧(i4[17]* i4[18]))

(22) -> (19), if ((i4[22]* i4[19])∧(i7[22]* 0)∧(i7[22]* i7[19]))

(24) -> (19), if ((i7[24]* i7[19])∧(i69[24] + -1* 0)∧(i4[24]* i4[19]))

(19) -> (20), if ((i4[19]* i4[20])∧(i7[19]* i7[20])∧(i7[19]* i83[20]))

(21) -> (20), if ((i83[21] + -1* i83[20])∧(i7[21]* i7[20])∧(i4[21]* i4[20]))

(20) -> (21), if ((i4[20]* i4[21])∧(i83[20]* i83[21])∧(i7[20]* i7[21])∧(i83[20] > 0* TRUE))

(25) -> (22), if ((i7[25]* i7[22])∧(i7[25]* 0)∧(i4[25]* i4[22]))

(27) -> (22), if ((i7[27]* i7[22])∧(i58[27] + -1* 0)∧(i4[27]* i4[22]))

(22) -> (23), if ((i7[22]* i69[23])∧(i7[22]* i7[23])∧(i4[22]* i4[23]))

(24) -> (23), if ((i4[24]* i4[23])∧(i69[24] + -1* i69[23])∧(i7[24]* i7[23]))

(23) -> (24), if ((i69[23] > 0* TRUE)∧(i69[23]* i69[24])∧(i4[23]* i4[24])∧(i7[23]* i7[24]))

(28) -> (25), if ((i7[28]* i7[25])∧(i4[28]* i4[25])∧(i7[28]* 0))

(30) -> (25), if ((i4[30]* i4[25])∧(i47[30] + -1* 0)∧(i7[30]* i7[25]))

(25) -> (26), if ((i4[25]* i4[26])∧(i7[25]* i7[26])∧(i7[25]* i58[26]))

(27) -> (26), if ((i4[27]* i4[26])∧(i58[27] + -1* i58[26])∧(i7[27]* i7[26]))

(26) -> (27), if ((i7[26]* i7[27])∧(i58[26] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[26]* i4[27])∧(i58[26]* i58[27]))

(31) -> (28), if ((i7[31]* i7[28])∧(i7[31]* 0)∧(i4[31]* i4[28]))

(33) -> (28), if ((i32[33] + -1* 0)∧(i7[33]* i7[28])∧(i4[33]* i4[28]))

(28) -> (29), if ((i7[28]* i47[29])∧(i4[28]* i4[29])∧(i7[28]* i7[29]))

(30) -> (29), if ((i7[30]* i7[29])∧(i47[30] + -1* i47[29])∧(i4[30]* i4[29]))

(29) -> (30), if ((i7[29]* i7[30])∧(i47[29] > 0* TRUE)∧(i4[29]* i4[30])∧(i47[29]* i47[30]))

(35) -> (31), if ((i7[35]* 0)∧(i4[35]* i4[31])∧(i7[35]* i7[31]))

(39) -> (31), if ((i22[39] + -1* 0)∧(i4[39]* i4[31])∧(i7[39]* i7[31]))

(31) -> (32), if ((i7[31]* i32[32])∧(i4[31]* i4[32])∧(i7[31]* i7[32]))

(33) -> (32), if ((i4[33]* i4[32])∧(i32[33] + -1* i32[32])∧(i7[33]* i7[32]))

(32) -> (33), if ((i7[32]* i7[33])∧(i4[32]* i4[33])∧(i32[32]* i32[33])∧(i32[32] > 0* TRUE))

(0) -> (34), if ((i4[0]* i4[34])∧(i7[0] + 1* i7[34]))

(34) -> (35), if ((i7[34] > 0 && i7[34] < 100* TRUE)∧(i7[34]* i7[35])∧(i4[34]* i4[35]))

(35) -> (38), if ((i4[35]* i4[38])∧(i7[35]* i22[38])∧(i7[35]* i7[38]))

(39) -> (38), if ((i7[39]* i7[38])∧(i4[39]* i4[38])∧(i22[39] + -1* i22[38]))

(38) -> (39), if ((i22[38]* i22[39])∧(i22[38] > 0* TRUE)∧(i7[38]* i7[39])∧(i4[38]* i4[39]))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

### (16) IDPNonInfProof (SOUND transformation)

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 COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]), COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)), LOAD173(i4[31], i7[31], 0) → LOAD230(i4[31], i7[31], i7[31]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (1) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (2) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(3)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] + [(-1)bni_121]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (3) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(4)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] + [(-1)bni_121]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (4) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(5)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] + [(-1)bni_121]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (5) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(6)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (6) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(7)    (i22[38] ≥ 0∧i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]), COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)), LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (8) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (9) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(10)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] + [(-1)bni_121]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (10) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(11)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] + [(-1)bni_121]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (11) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(12)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] + [(-1)bni_121]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (12) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(13)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (13) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(14)    (i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_121] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_121 + (-1)Bound*bni_121] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_122] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD173(i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]) → COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38]), COND_LOAD173(TRUE, i4[39], i7[39], i22[39]) → LOAD173(i4[39], i7[39], +(i22[39], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (15) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (16) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(17)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_123 + (-1)Bound*bni_123] + [(-1)bni_123]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_124] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (17) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(18)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_123 + (-1)Bound*bni_123] + [(-1)bni_123]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_124] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (18) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(19)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_123 + (-1)Bound*bni_123] + [(-1)bni_123]i7[38] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_124] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (19) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(20)    (i22[38] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_123] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_123 + (-1)Bound*bni_123] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_124] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (20) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(21)    (i22[38] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD173(>(i22[38], 0), i4[38], i7[38], i22[38])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_123] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_123 + (-1)Bound*bni_123] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_124] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]), COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)), LOAD230(i4[28], i7[28], 0) → LOAD290(i4[28], i7[28], i7[28]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (22) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (23) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(24)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] + [(-1)bni_125]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (24) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(25)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] + [(-1)bni_125]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (25) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(26)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] + [(-1)bni_125]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (26) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(27)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (27) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(28)    (i32[32] ≥ 0∧i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]), COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)), LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (29) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (30) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(31)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] + [(-1)bni_125]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (31) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(32)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] + [(-1)bni_125]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (32) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(33)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] + [(-1)bni_125]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (33) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(34)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (34) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(35)    (i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_125] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_125 + (-1)Bound*bni_125] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_126] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD230(i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]) → COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32]), COND_LOAD230(TRUE, i4[33], i7[33], i32[33]) → LOAD230(i4[33], i7[33], +(i32[33], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (36) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (37) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(38)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_127 + (-1)Bound*bni_127] + [(-1)bni_127]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_128] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (38) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(39)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_127 + (-1)Bound*bni_127] + [(-1)bni_127]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_128] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (39) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(40)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_127 + (-1)Bound*bni_127] + [(-1)bni_127]i7[32] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_128] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (40) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(41)    (i32[32] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_127] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_127 + (-1)Bound*bni_127] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_128] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (41) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(42)    (i32[32] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD230(>(i32[32], 0), i4[32], i7[32], i32[32])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_127] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_127 + (-1)Bound*bni_127] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_128] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]), COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)), LOAD290(i4[25], i7[25], 0) → LOAD348(i4[25], i7[25], i7[25]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (43) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (44) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(45)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] + [(-1)bni_129]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (45) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(46)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] + [(-1)bni_129]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (46) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(47)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] + [(-1)bni_129]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (47) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(48)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (48) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(49)    (i47[29] ≥ 0∧i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]), COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)), LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (50) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (51) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(52)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] + [(-1)bni_129]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (52) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(53)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] + [(-1)bni_129]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (53) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(54)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] + [(-1)bni_129]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (54) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(55)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (55) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(56)    (i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_129] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_129 + (-1)Bound*bni_129] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_130] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD290(i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]) → COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29]), COND_LOAD290(TRUE, i4[30], i7[30], i47[30]) → LOAD290(i4[30], i7[30], +(i47[30], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (57) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (58) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(59)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_131 + (-1)Bound*bni_131] + [(-1)bni_131]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_132] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (59) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(60)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_131 + (-1)Bound*bni_131] + [(-1)bni_131]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_132] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (60) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(61)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_131 + (-1)Bound*bni_131] + [(-1)bni_131]i7[29] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_132] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (61) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(62)    (i47[29] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_131] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_131 + (-1)Bound*bni_131] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_132] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (62) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(63)    (i47[29] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD290(>(i47[29], 0), i4[29], i7[29], i47[29])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_131] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_131 + (-1)Bound*bni_131] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_132] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]), COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)), LOAD348(i4[22], i7[22], 0) → LOAD404(i4[22], i7[22], i7[22]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (64) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (65) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(66)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] + [(-1)bni_133]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (66) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(67)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] + [(-1)bni_133]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (67) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(68)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] + [(-1)bni_133]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (68) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(69)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (69) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(70)    (i58[26] ≥ 0∧i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]), COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)), LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (71) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (72) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(73)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] + [(-1)bni_133]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (73) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(74)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] + [(-1)bni_133]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (74) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(75)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] + [(-1)bni_133]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (75) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(76)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (76) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(77)    (i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_133] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_133 + (-1)Bound*bni_133] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_134] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD348(i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]) → COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26]), COND_LOAD348(TRUE, i4[27], i7[27], i58[27]) → LOAD348(i4[27], i7[27], +(i58[27], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (78) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (79) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(80)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_135 + (-1)Bound*bni_135] + [(-1)bni_135]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_136] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (80) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(81)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_135 + (-1)Bound*bni_135] + [(-1)bni_135]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_136] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (81) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(82)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_135 + (-1)Bound*bni_135] + [(-1)bni_135]i7[26] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_136] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (82) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(83)    (i58[26] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_135] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_135 + (-1)Bound*bni_135] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_136] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (83) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(84)    (i58[26] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD348(>(i58[26], 0), i4[26], i7[26], i58[26])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_135] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_135 + (-1)Bound*bni_135] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_136] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]), COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)), LOAD404(i4[19], i7[19], 0) → LOAD472(i4[19], i7[19], i7[19]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (85) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (86) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(87)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] + [(-1)bni_137]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (87) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(88)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] + [(-1)bni_137]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (88) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(89)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] + [(-1)bni_137]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (89) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(90)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (90) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(91)    (i69[23] ≥ 0∧i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]), COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)), LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (92) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (93) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(94)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] + [(-1)bni_137]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (94) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(95)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] + [(-1)bni_137]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (95) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(96)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] + [(-1)bni_137]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (96) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(97)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (97) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(98)    (i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_137] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_137 + (-1)Bound*bni_137] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_138] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD404(i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]) → COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23]), COND_LOAD404(TRUE, i4[24], i7[24], i69[24]) → LOAD404(i4[24], i7[24], +(i69[24], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (99) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (100) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(101)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_139 + (-1)Bound*bni_139] + [(-1)bni_139]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_140] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (101) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(102)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_139 + (-1)Bound*bni_139] + [(-1)bni_139]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_140] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (102) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(103)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_139 + (-1)Bound*bni_139] + [(-1)bni_139]i7[23] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_140] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (103) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(104)    (i69[23] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_139] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_139 + (-1)Bound*bni_139] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_140] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (104) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(105)    (i69[23] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD404(>(i69[23], 0), i4[23], i7[23], i69[23])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_139] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_139 + (-1)Bound*bni_139] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_140] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]), COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)), LOAD472(i4[16], i7[16], 0) → LOAD527(i4[16], i7[16], i7[16]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (106) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (107) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(108)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] + [(-1)bni_141]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (108) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(109)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] + [(-1)bni_141]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (109) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(110)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] + [(-1)bni_141]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (110) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(111)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (111) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(112)    (i83[20] ≥ 0∧i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]), COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)), LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (113) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (114) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(115)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] + [(-1)bni_141]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (115) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(116)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] + [(-1)bni_141]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (116) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(117)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] + [(-1)bni_141]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (117) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(118)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (118) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(119)    (i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_141] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_141 + (-1)Bound*bni_141] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_142] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD472(i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]) → COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20]), COND_LOAD472(TRUE, i4[21], i7[21], i83[21]) → LOAD472(i4[21], i7[21], +(i83[21], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (120) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (121) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(122)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_143 + (-1)Bound*bni_143] + [(-1)bni_143]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_144] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (122) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(123)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_143 + (-1)Bound*bni_143] + [(-1)bni_143]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_144] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (123) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(124)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_143 + (-1)Bound*bni_143] + [(-1)bni_143]i7[20] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_144] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (124) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(125)    (i83[20] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_143] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_143 + (-1)Bound*bni_143] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_144] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (125) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(126)    (i83[20] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD472(>(i83[20], 0), i4[20], i7[20], i83[20])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_143] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_143 + (-1)Bound*bni_143] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_144] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]), COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)), LOAD527(i4[13], i7[13], 0) → LOAD578(i4[13], i7[13], i7[13]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (127) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (128) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(129)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] + [(-1)bni_145]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (129) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(130)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] + [(-1)bni_145]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (130) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(131)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] + [(-1)bni_145]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (131) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(132)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (132) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(133)    (i94[17] ≥ 0∧i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]), COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)), LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (134) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (135) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(136)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] + [(-1)bni_145]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (136) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(137)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] + [(-1)bni_145]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (137) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(138)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] + [(-1)bni_145]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (138) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(139)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (139) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(140)    (i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_145] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_145 + (-1)Bound*bni_145] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_146] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD527(i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]) → COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17]), COND_LOAD527(TRUE, i4[18], i7[18], i94[18]) → LOAD527(i4[18], i7[18], +(i94[18], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (141) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (142) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(143)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_147 + (-1)Bound*bni_147] + [(-1)bni_147]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_148] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (143) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(144)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_147 + (-1)Bound*bni_147] + [(-1)bni_147]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_148] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (144) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(145)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_147 + (-1)Bound*bni_147] + [(-1)bni_147]i7[17] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_148] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (145) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(146)    (i94[17] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_147] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_147 + (-1)Bound*bni_147] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_148] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (146) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(147)    (i94[17] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD527(>(i94[17], 0), i4[17], i7[17], i94[17])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_147] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_147 + (-1)Bound*bni_147] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_148] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]), COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)), LOAD578(i4[10], i7[10], 0) → LOAD635(i4[10], i7[10], i7[10]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (148) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (149) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(150)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] + [(-1)bni_149]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (150) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(151)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] + [(-1)bni_149]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (151) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(152)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] + [(-1)bni_149]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (152) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(153)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (153) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(154)    (i106[14] ≥ 0∧i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]), COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)), LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (155) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (156) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(157)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] + [(-1)bni_149]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (157) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(158)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] + [(-1)bni_149]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (158) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(159)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] + [(-1)bni_149]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (159) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(160)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (160) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(161)    (i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_149] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_149 + (-1)Bound*bni_149] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_150] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD578(i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]) → COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14]), COND_LOAD578(TRUE, i4[15], i7[15], i106[15]) → LOAD578(i4[15], i7[15], +(i106[15], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (162) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (163) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(164)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_151 + (-1)Bound*bni_151] + [(-1)bni_151]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_152] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (164) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(165)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_151 + (-1)Bound*bni_151] + [(-1)bni_151]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_152] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (165) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(166)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_151 + (-1)Bound*bni_151] + [(-1)bni_151]i7[14] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_152] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (166) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(167)    (i106[14] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_151] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_151 + (-1)Bound*bni_151] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_152] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (167) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(168)    (i106[14] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD578(>(i106[14], 0), i4[14], i7[14], i106[14])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_151] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_151 + (-1)Bound*bni_151] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_152] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]), COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)), LOAD635(i4[7], i7[7], 0) → LOAD688(i4[7], i7[7], i7[7]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (169) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (170) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(171)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] + [(-1)bni_153]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (171) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(172)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] + [(-1)bni_153]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (172) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(173)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] + [(-1)bni_153]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (173) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(174)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (174) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(175)    (i118[11] ≥ 0∧i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]), COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)), LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (176) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (177) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(178)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] + [(-1)bni_153]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (178) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(179)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] + [(-1)bni_153]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (179) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(180)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] + [(-1)bni_153]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (180) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(181)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (181) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(182)    (i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_153] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_153 + (-1)Bound*bni_153] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_154] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD635(i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]) → COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11]), COND_LOAD635(TRUE, i4[12], i7[12], i118[12]) → LOAD635(i4[12], i7[12], +(i118[12], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (183) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (184) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(185)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_155 + (-1)Bound*bni_155] + [(-1)bni_155]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_156] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (185) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(186)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_155 + (-1)Bound*bni_155] + [(-1)bni_155]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_156] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (186) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(187)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_155 + (-1)Bound*bni_155] + [(-1)bni_155]i7[11] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_156] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (187) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(188)    (i118[11] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_155] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_155 + (-1)Bound*bni_155] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_156] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (188) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(189)    (i118[11] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(COND_LOAD635(>(i118[11], 0), i4[11], i7[11], i118[11])), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_155] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_155 + (-1)Bound*bni_155] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_156] ≥ 0)

For Pair COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]), COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)), LOAD688(i4[4], i7[4], 0) → LOAD740(i4[4], i7[4], i7[4]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (190) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (191) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(192)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] + [(-1)bni_157]i7[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (192) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(193)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] + [(-1)bni_157]i7[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (193) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(194)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] + [(-1)bni_157]i7[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (194) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(195)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0∧i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (195) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(196)    (i126[8] ≥ 0∧i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]), COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)), LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (197) using rules (III), (IV) which results in the following new constraint:

We simplified constraint (198) using rule (POLY_CONSTRAINTS) which results in the following new constraint:

(199)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] + [(-1)bni_157]i7[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (199) using rule (IDP_POLY_SIMPLIFY) which results in the following new constraint:

(200)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] + [(-1)bni_157]i7[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (200) using rule (POLY_REMOVE_MIN_MAX) which results in the following new constraint:

(201)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] + [(-1)bni_157]i7[8] ≥ 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (201) using rule (IDP_UNRESTRICTED_VARS) which results in the following new constraint:

(202)    (i126[8] + [-1] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

We simplified constraint (202) using rule (IDP_SMT_SPLIT) which results in the following new constraint:

(203)    (i126[8] ≥ 0 ⇒ (UIncreasing(LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1))), ≥)∧[(-1)bni_157] = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bni_157 + (-1)Bound*bni_157] ≥ 0∧0 = 0∧0 = 0∧[(-1)bso_158] ≥ 0)

For Pair LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) the following chains were created:
• We consider the chain LOAD688(i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]) → COND_LOAD688(>(i126[8], 0), i4[8], i7[8], i126[8]), COND_LOAD688(TRUE, i4[9], i7[9], i126[9]) → LOAD688(i4[9], i7[9], +(i126[9], -1)) which results in the following constraint:

We simplified constraint (204) using rule (IV) which results in the following new constraint: