Paper detail

Proving termination with transition invariants of height omega

The Termination Theorem by Podelski and Rybalchenko states that the reduction relations which are terminating from any initial state are exactly the reduction relations whose transitive closure, restricted to the accessible states, is included in some finite union of well-founded relations. An alternative statement of the theorem is that terminating reduction relations are precisely those having a "disjunctively well-founded transition invariant". From this result the same authors and Byron Cook designed an algorithm checking a sufficient condition for termination for a while-if program. The algorithm looks for a disjunctively well-founded transition invariant, made of well-founded relations of height omega, and if it finds it, it deduces the termination for the while-if program using the Termination Theorem. This raises an interesting question: What is the status of reduction relations having a disjunctively well-founded transition invariant where each relation has height omega? An answer to this question can lead to a characterization of the set of while-if programs which the termination algorithm can prove to be terminating. The goal of this work is to prove that they are exactly the set of reduction relations having height omega^n for some n < omega. Besides, if all the relations in the transition invariant are primitive recursive and the reduction relation is the graph of the restriction to some primitive recursive set of a primitive recursive map, then a final state is computable by some primitive recursive map in the initial state. As a corollary we derive that the set of functions, having at least one implementation in Podelski Rybalchenko while-if language with a well-founded disjunctively transition invariant where each relation has height omega, is exactly the set of primitive recursive functions.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.