0.00/0.00	YES
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Succeeded in reading "/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.trs".
0.00/0.00	    (CONDITIONTYPE ORIENTED)
0.00/0.00	    (VAR x)
0.00/0.00	    (RULES
0.00/0.00	      f(x) -> x | x == a, b == x
0.00/0.00	      a -> b
0.00/0.00	    )
0.00/0.00	    (COMMENT doi:10.2168/LMCS-8 ( 3:4 ) 2012 [64] Example 3.5 ( R_5 ) submitted by: Thomas Sternagel and Aart Middeldorp)
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	No "->="-rules.
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Decomposed conditions if possible.
0.00/0.00	    (CONDITIONTYPE ORIENTED)
0.00/0.00	    (VAR x)
0.00/0.00	    (RULES
0.00/0.00	      f(b) -> b | b == a
0.00/0.00	      a -> b
0.00/0.00	    )
0.00/0.00	    (COMMENT doi:10.2168/LMCS-8 ( 3:4 ) 2012 [64] Example 3.5 ( R_5 ) submitted by: Thomas Sternagel and Aart Middeldorp)
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Removed infeasible rules as much as possible.
0.00/0.00	    (VAR x)
0.00/0.00	    (RULES
0.00/0.00	      a -> b
0.00/0.00	    )
0.00/0.00	    (COMMENT doi:10.2168/LMCS-8 ( 3:4 ) 2012 [64] Example 3.5 ( R_5 ) submitted by: Thomas Sternagel and Aart Middeldorp)
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Try to disprove confluence of the following (C)TRS:
0.00/0.00	    (VAR x)
0.00/0.00	    (RULES
0.00/0.00	      a -> b
0.00/0.00	    )
0.00/0.00	    (COMMENT doi:10.2168/LMCS-8 ( 3:4 ) 2012 [64] Example 3.5 ( R_5 ) submitted by: Thomas Sternagel and Aart Middeldorp)
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Try to prove confluence of the following TRS:
0.00/0.00	    (VAR x)
0.00/0.00	    (RULES
0.00/0.00	      a -> b
0.00/0.00	    )
0.00/0.00	    (COMMENT doi:10.2168/LMCS-8 ( 3:4 ) 2012 [64] Example 3.5 ( R_5 ) submitted by: Thomas Sternagel and Aart Middeldorp)
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Succeeded in proving confluence due to orthogonality.
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	Proved via the following orthogonal TRS:
0.00/0.00	(VAR x)
0.00/0.00	(RULES
0.00/0.00	  a -> b
0.00/0.00	)
0.00/0.00	(COMMENT doi:10.2168/LMCS-8 ( 3:4 ) 2012 [64] Example 3.5 ( R_5 ) submitted by: Thomas Sternagel and Aart Middeldorp)
0.00/0.00	
0.00/0.00	YES
0.00/0.00	EOF