Term Rewriting System R:
[f, x, xs, ys]
app(app(map, f), nil) -> nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, x), app(concat, app(app(map, flatten), xs)))
app(concat, nil) -> nil
app(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(append, x), app(concat, xs))
app(app(append, nil), xs) -> xs
app(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> app(app(cons, x), app(app(append, xs), ys))
Termination of R to be shown.
R
↳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
↳OC
→TRS2
↳Dependency Pair Analysis
R contains the following Dependency Pairs:
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(cons, app(f, x))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(f, x)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(app(cons, x), app(concat, app(app(map, flatten), xs)))
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(cons, x)
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(concat, app(app(map, flatten), xs))
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, flatten), xs)
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(map, flatten)
APP(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(append, x), app(concat, xs))
APP(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(append, x)
APP(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(concat, xs)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> APP(app(cons, x), app(app(append, xs), ys))
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> APP(app(append, xs), ys)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> APP(append, xs)
Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> APP(app(append, xs), ys)
Rules:
app(app(map, f), nil) -> nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, x), app(concat, app(app(map, flatten), xs)))
app(concat, nil) -> nil
app(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(append, x), app(concat, xs))
app(app(append, nil), xs) -> xs
app(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> app(app(cons, x), app(app(append, xs), ys))
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 7 non-usable-rules.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
...
→DP Problem 4
↳A-Transformation
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> APP(app(append, xs), ys)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We have an applicative DP problem with proper arity. Thus we can use the A-Transformation to obtain one new DP problem which consists of the A-transformed TRSs.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
...
→DP Problem 5
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
APPEND(cons(x, xs), ys) -> APPEND(xs, ys)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- APPEND(cons(x, xs), ys) -> APPEND(xs, ys)
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:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
APP(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(concat, xs)
Rules:
app(app(map, f), nil) -> nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, x), app(concat, app(app(map, flatten), xs)))
app(concat, nil) -> nil
app(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(append, x), app(concat, xs))
app(app(append, nil), xs) -> xs
app(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> app(app(cons, x), app(app(append, xs), ys))
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 7 non-usable-rules.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
...
→DP Problem 6
↳A-Transformation
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
APP(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(concat, xs)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We have an applicative DP problem with proper arity. Thus we can use the A-Transformation to obtain one new DP problem which consists of the A-transformed TRSs.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
...
→DP Problem 7
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
CONCAT(cons(x, xs)) -> CONCAT(xs)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- CONCAT(cons(x, xs)) -> CONCAT(xs)
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:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
Dependency Pairs:
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, flatten), xs)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(f, x)
Rules:
app(app(map, f), nil) -> nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, x), app(concat, app(app(map, flatten), xs)))
app(concat, nil) -> nil
app(concat, app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(append, x), app(concat, xs))
app(app(append, nil), xs) -> xs
app(app(append, app(app(cons, x), xs)), ys) -> app(app(cons, x), app(app(append, xs), ys))
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 7 non-usable-rules.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
...
→DP Problem 8
↳Size-Change Principle
Dependency Pairs:
APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, flatten), xs)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(f, x)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- APP(flatten, app(app(node, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, flatten), xs)
- APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(map, f), xs)
- APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(f, 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:
app(x1, x2) -> app(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
Termination of R successfully shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes