Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y, z]
double(0) -> 0
double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
half(0) -> 0
half(s(0)) -> 0
half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x))
half(double(x)) -> x
-(x, 0) -> x
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
if(0, y, z) -> y
if(s(x), y, z) -> z
Termination of R to be shown.
R
↳Removing Redundant Rules
Removing the following rules from R which fullfill a polynomial ordering:
double(0) -> 0
half(double(x)) -> x
-(x, 0) -> x
if(0, y, z) -> y
if(s(x), y, z) -> z
where the Polynomial interpretation:
POL(if(x1, x2, x3)) | = 1 + x1 + x2 + x3 |
POL(0) | = 0 |
POL(s(x1)) | = x1 |
POL(half(x1)) | = x1 |
POL(-(x1, x2)) | = 1 + x1 + x2 |
POL(double(x1)) | = 1 + x1 |
was used.
Not all Rules of R can be deleted, so we still have to regard a part of R.
R
↳RRRPolo
→TRS2
↳Removing Redundant Rules
Removing the following rules from R which fullfill a polynomial ordering:
half(0) -> 0
half(s(0)) -> 0
where the Polynomial interpretation:
POL(0) | = 1 |
POL(s(x1)) | = x1 |
POL(half(x1)) | = 2·x1 |
POL(-(x1, x2)) | = 2 + x1 + x2 |
POL(double(x1)) | = x1 |
was used.
Not all Rules of R can be deleted, so we still have to regard a part of R.
R
↳RRRPolo
→TRS2
↳RRRPolo
→TRS3
↳Removing Redundant Rules
Removing the following rules from R which fullfill a polynomial ordering:
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x))
where the Polynomial interpretation:
POL(s(x1)) | = 1 + x1 |
POL(half(x1)) | = x1 |
POL(-(x1, x2)) | = 1 + x1 + x2 |
POL(double(x1)) | = 2·x1 |
was used.
Not all Rules of R can be deleted, so we still have to regard a part of R.
R
↳RRRPolo
→TRS2
↳RRRPolo
→TRS3
↳RRRPolo
...
→TRS4
↳Overlay and local confluence Check
The TRS is overlay and locally confluent (all critical pairs are trivially joinable).Hence, we can switch to innermost.
R
↳RRRPolo
→TRS2
↳RRRPolo
→TRS3
↳RRRPolo
...
→TRS5
↳Dependency Pair Analysis
R contains the following Dependency Pairs:
DOUBLE(s(x)) -> DOUBLE(x)
Furthermore, R contains one SCC.
R
↳RRRPolo
→TRS2
↳RRRPolo
→TRS3
↳RRRPolo
...
→DP Problem 1
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
Dependency Pair:
DOUBLE(s(x)) -> DOUBLE(x)
Rule:
double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 1 non-usable-rules.
R
↳RRRPolo
→TRS2
↳RRRPolo
→TRS3
↳RRRPolo
...
→DP Problem 2
↳Size-Change Principle
Dependency Pair:
DOUBLE(s(x)) -> DOUBLE(x)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- DOUBLE(s(x)) -> DOUBLE(x)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
s(x1) -> s(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
Termination of R successfully shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes