Term Rewriting System R:
[X, Y, Z, X1, X2]
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
Termination of R to be shown.
R
↳Dependency Pair Analysis
R contains the following Dependency Pairs:
ACTIVE(from(X)) -> CONS(X, from(s(X)))
ACTIVE(from(X)) -> FROM(s(X))
ACTIVE(from(X)) -> S(X)
ACTIVE(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> SEL(X, Z)
ACTIVE(from(X)) -> FROM(active(X))
ACTIVE(from(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) -> CONS(active(X1), X2)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(s(X)) -> S(active(X))
ACTIVE(s(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> SEL(active(X1), X2)
ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> SEL(X1, active(X2))
ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X2)
FROM(mark(X)) -> FROM(X)
FROM(ok(X)) -> FROM(X)
CONS(mark(X1), X2) -> CONS(X1, X2)
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> CONS(X1, X2)
S(mark(X)) -> S(X)
S(ok(X)) -> S(X)
SEL(mark(X1), X2) -> SEL(X1, X2)
SEL(X1, mark(X2)) -> SEL(X1, X2)
SEL(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> SEL(X1, X2)
PROPER(from(X)) -> FROM(proper(X))
PROPER(from(X)) -> PROPER(X)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> CONS(proper(X1), proper(X2))
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X1)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X2)
PROPER(s(X)) -> S(proper(X))
PROPER(s(X)) -> PROPER(X)
PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> SEL(proper(X1), proper(X2))
PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X1)
PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X2)
TOP(mark(X)) -> TOP(proper(X))
TOP(mark(X)) -> PROPER(X)
TOP(ok(X)) -> TOP(active(X))
TOP(ok(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
Furthermore, R contains seven SCCs.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
Dependency Pairs:
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> CONS(X1, X2)
CONS(mark(X1), X2) -> CONS(X1, X2)
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
We number the DPs as follows:
- CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> CONS(X1, X2)
- CONS(mark(X1), X2) -> CONS(X1, X2)
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:
mark(x1) -> mark(x1)
ok(x1) -> ok(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
Dependency Pairs:
FROM(ok(X)) -> FROM(X)
FROM(mark(X)) -> FROM(X)
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
We number the DPs as follows:
- FROM(ok(X)) -> FROM(X)
- FROM(mark(X)) -> FROM(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:
mark(x1) -> mark(x1)
ok(x1) -> ok(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
Dependency Pairs:
S(ok(X)) -> S(X)
S(mark(X)) -> S(X)
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
We number the DPs as follows:
- S(ok(X)) -> S(X)
- S(mark(X)) -> S(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:
mark(x1) -> mark(x1)
ok(x1) -> ok(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
Dependency Pairs:
SEL(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> SEL(X1, X2)
SEL(X1, mark(X2)) -> SEL(X1, X2)
SEL(mark(X1), X2) -> SEL(X1, X2)
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
We number the DPs as follows:
- SEL(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> SEL(X1, X2)
- SEL(X1, mark(X2)) -> SEL(X1, X2)
- SEL(mark(X1), X2) -> SEL(X1, X2)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s): {3, 2, 1} | , | {3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
2 | > | 2 |
|
{3, 2, 1} | , | {3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | = | 1 |
2 | > | 2 |
|
{3, 2, 1} | , | {3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
2 | = | 2 |
|
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s): {3, 2, 1} | , | {3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
2 | = | 2 |
|
{3, 2, 1} | , | {3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | = | 1 |
2 | > | 2 |
|
{3, 2, 1} | , | {3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
2 | > | 2 |
|
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
mark(x1) -> mark(x1)
ok(x1) -> ok(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
Dependency Pairs:
ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(s(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(from(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
We number the DPs as follows:
- ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X2)
- ACTIVE(sel(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X1)
- ACTIVE(s(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
- ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) -> ACTIVE(X1)
- ACTIVE(from(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s): {5, 4, 3, 2, 1} | , | {5, 4, 3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
|
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s): {5, 4, 3, 2, 1} | , | {5, 4, 3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
|
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
from(x1) -> from(x1)
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
s(x1) -> s(x1)
sel(x1, x2) -> sel(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
Dependency Pairs:
PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X2)
PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X1)
PROPER(s(X)) -> PROPER(X)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X2)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X1)
PROPER(from(X)) -> PROPER(X)
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
We number the DPs as follows:
- PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X2)
- PROPER(sel(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X1)
- PROPER(s(X)) -> PROPER(X)
- PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X2)
- PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) -> PROPER(X1)
- PROPER(from(X)) -> PROPER(X)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s): {6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1} | , | {6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
|
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s): {6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1} | , | {6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1} |
---|
1 | > | 1 |
|
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
from(x1) -> from(x1)
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
sel(x1, x2) -> sel(x1, x2)
s(x1) -> s(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Narrowing Transformation
Dependency Pairs:
TOP(ok(X)) -> TOP(active(X))
TOP(mark(X)) -> TOP(proper(X))
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
On this DP problem, a Narrowing SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule
TOP(mark(X)) -> TOP(proper(X))
five new Dependency Pairs
are created:
TOP(mark(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(0)) -> TOP(ok(0))
The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
→DP Problem 8
↳Narrowing Transformation
Dependency Pairs:
TOP(mark(0)) -> TOP(ok(0))
TOP(mark(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(proper(X'')))
TOP(ok(X)) -> TOP(active(X))
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
On this DP problem, a Narrowing SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule
TOP(ok(X)) -> TOP(active(X))
eight new Dependency Pairs
are created:
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(mark(cons(X'', from(s(X'')))))
TOP(ok(sel(0, cons(X'', Y')))) -> TOP(mark(X''))
TOP(ok(sel(s(X''), cons(Y', Z')))) -> TOP(mark(sel(X'', Z')))
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(X1', active(X2')))
The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
→DP Problem 8
↳Nar
...
→DP Problem 9
↳Negative Polynomial Order
Dependency Pairs:
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(X1', active(X2')))
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(sel(s(X''), cons(Y', Z')))) -> TOP(mark(sel(X'', Z')))
TOP(ok(sel(0, cons(X'', Y')))) -> TOP(mark(X''))
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(mark(cons(X'', from(s(X'')))))
TOP(mark(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
The following Dependency Pair can be strictly oriented using the given order.
TOP(ok(sel(0, cons(X'', Y')))) -> TOP(mark(X''))
Moreover, the following usable rules (regarding the implicit AFS) are oriented.
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
Used ordering:
Polynomial Order with Interpretation:
POL( TOP(x1) ) = x1
POL( ok(x1) ) = x1
POL( sel(x1, x2) ) = x2 + 1
POL( cons(x1, x2) ) = x1 + x2
POL( mark(x1) ) = x1
POL( from(x1) ) = x1
POL( s(x1) ) = 0
POL( active(x1) ) = x1
POL( proper(x1) ) = x1
POL( 0 ) = 0
This results in one new DP problem.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
→DP Problem 8
↳Nar
...
→DP Problem 10
↳Negative Polynomial Order
Dependency Pairs:
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(X1', active(X2')))
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(sel(s(X''), cons(Y', Z')))) -> TOP(mark(sel(X'', Z')))
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(mark(cons(X'', from(s(X'')))))
TOP(mark(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
The following Dependency Pair can be strictly oriented using the given order.
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(mark(cons(X'', from(s(X'')))))
Moreover, the following usable rules (regarding the implicit AFS) are oriented.
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
Used ordering:
Polynomial Order with Interpretation:
POL( TOP(x1) ) = x1
POL( ok(x1) ) = x1
POL( from(x1) ) = 1
POL( mark(x1) ) = x1
POL( cons(x1, x2) ) = 0
POL( sel(x1, x2) ) = 0
POL( s(x1) ) = 0
This results in one new DP problem.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳SCP
→DP Problem 2
↳SCP
→DP Problem 3
↳SCP
→DP Problem 4
↳SCP
→DP Problem 5
↳SCP
→DP Problem 6
↳SCP
→DP Problem 7
↳Nar
→DP Problem 8
↳Nar
...
→DP Problem 11
↳Remaining Obligation(s)
The following remains to be proven:
Dependency Pairs:
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(X1', active(X2')))
TOP(ok(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(active(X1'), X2'))
TOP(ok(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(active(X'')))
TOP(ok(sel(s(X''), cons(Y', Z')))) -> TOP(mark(sel(X'', Z')))
TOP(mark(s(X''))) -> TOP(s(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(cons(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(cons(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
TOP(mark(from(X''))) -> TOP(from(proper(X'')))
TOP(mark(sel(X1', X2'))) -> TOP(sel(proper(X1'), proper(X2')))
Rules:
active(from(X)) -> mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(sel(0, cons(X, Y))) -> mark(X)
active(sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z))) -> mark(sel(X, Z))
active(from(X)) -> from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) -> s(active(X))
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(active(X1), X2)
active(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(X1, active(X2))
from(mark(X)) -> mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) -> ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(cons(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) -> mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) -> ok(s(X))
sel(mark(X1), X2) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(X1, mark(X2)) -> mark(sel(X1, X2))
sel(ok(X1), ok(X2)) -> ok(sel(X1, X2))
proper(from(X)) -> from(proper(X))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(s(X)) -> s(proper(X))
proper(sel(X1, X2)) -> sel(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(0) -> ok(0)
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))
The Proof could not be continued due to a Timeout.
Termination of R could not be shown.
Duration:
1:00 minutes