YES 0.784
H-Termination proof of /home/matraf/haskell/eval_FullyBlown_Fast/Monad.hs
H-Termination of the given Haskell-Program with start terms could successfully be proven:
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
mainModule Monad
| ((zipWithM_ :: Monad a => (b -> c -> a d) -> [b] -> [c] -> a ()) :: Monad a => (b -> c -> a d) -> [b] -> [c] -> a ()) |
module Monad where
| import qualified Maybe import qualified Prelude
|
| zipWithM_ :: Monad d => (c -> a -> d b) -> [c] -> [a] -> d ()
zipWithM_ | f xs ys | = | sequence_ (zipWith f xs ys) |
|
module Maybe where
| import qualified Monad import qualified Prelude
|
Lambda Reductions:
The following Lambda expression
\_→q
is transformed to
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
mainModule Monad
| ((zipWithM_ :: Monad a => (b -> c -> a d) -> [b] -> [c] -> a ()) :: Monad a => (b -> c -> a d) -> [b] -> [c] -> a ()) |
module Maybe where
| import qualified Monad import qualified Prelude
|
module Monad where
| import qualified Maybe import qualified Prelude
|
| zipWithM_ :: Monad b => (a -> d -> b c) -> [a] -> [d] -> b ()
zipWithM_ | f xs ys | = | sequence_ (zipWith f xs ys) |
|
Replaced joker patterns by fresh variables and removed binding patterns.
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
mainModule Monad
| ((zipWithM_ :: Monad c => (d -> b -> c a) -> [d] -> [b] -> c ()) :: Monad c => (d -> b -> c a) -> [d] -> [b] -> c ()) |
module Monad where
| import qualified Maybe import qualified Prelude
|
| zipWithM_ :: Monad a => (c -> d -> a b) -> [c] -> [d] -> a ()
zipWithM_ | f xs ys | = | sequence_ (zipWith f xs ys) |
|
module Maybe where
| import qualified Monad import qualified Prelude
|
Cond Reductions:
The following Function with conditions
is transformed to
undefined0 | True | = undefined |
undefined1 | | = undefined0 False |
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
mainModule Monad
| (zipWithM_ :: Monad d => (b -> c -> d a) -> [b] -> [c] -> d ()) |
module Maybe where
| import qualified Monad import qualified Prelude
|
module Monad where
| import qualified Maybe import qualified Prelude
|
| zipWithM_ :: Monad d => (a -> c -> d b) -> [a] -> [c] -> d ()
zipWithM_ | f xs ys | = | sequence_ (zipWith f xs ys) |
|
Haskell To QDPs
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_psPs(:(ww60, ww61), ww9) → new_psPs(ww61, ww9)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- new_psPs(:(ww60, ww61), ww9) → new_psPs(ww61, ww9)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_gtGtEs(:(ww70, ww71), ww6, h) → new_gtGtEs(ww71, ww6, h)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- new_gtGtEs(:(ww70, ww71), ww6, h) → new_gtGtEs(ww71, ww6, h)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2, 3 >= 3
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_[], h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_[], h, ba, bb)
new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_Maybe, h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_Maybe, h, ba, bb)
new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_IO, h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_IO, h, ba, bb)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 3 SCCs.
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_IO, h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_IO, h, ba, bb)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_IO, h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_IO, h, ba, bb)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2, 3 > 3, 4 >= 4, 5 >= 5, 6 >= 6, 7 >= 7
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_Maybe, h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_Maybe, h, ba, bb)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_Maybe, h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_Maybe, h, ba, bb)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2, 3 > 3, 4 >= 4, 5 >= 5, 6 >= 6, 7 >= 7
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_[], h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_[], h, ba, bb)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem. From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- new_foldr(ww3, :(ww40, ww41), :(ww50, ww51), ty_[], h, ba, bb) → new_foldr(ww3, ww41, ww51, ty_[], h, ba, bb)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2, 3 > 3, 4 >= 4, 5 >= 5, 6 >= 6, 7 >= 7