YES 4.223
H-Termination proof of /home/matraf/haskell/eval_FullyBlown_Fast/empty.hs
H-Termination of the given Haskell-Program with start terms could successfully be proven:
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
mainModule Main
| ((isHexDigit :: Char -> Bool) :: -> Char Bool) |
module Main where
Replaced joker patterns by fresh variables and removed binding patterns.
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
mainModule Main
| ((isHexDigit :: Char -> Bool) :: -> Char Bool) |
module Main where
Cond Reductions:
The following Function with conditions
is transformed to
undefined0 | True | = undefined |
undefined1 | | = undefined0 False |
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
mainModule Main
| ((isHexDigit :: Char -> Bool) :: -> Char Bool) |
module Main where
Num Reduction: All numbers are transformed to thier corresponding representation with Pos, Neg, Succ and Zero.
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
mainModule Main
| (isHexDigit :: -> Char Bool) |
module Main where
Haskell To QDPs
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_not(Succ(vx30000), Succ(vx360)) → new_not(vx30000, vx360)
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_not(Succ(vx30000), Succ(vx360)) → new_not(vx30000, vx360)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_asAs(Succ(vx30000000), Succ(vx350000), vx59) → new_asAs(vx30000000, vx350000, vx59)
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_asAs(Succ(vx30000000), Succ(vx350000), vx59) → new_asAs(vx30000000, vx350000, vx59)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2, 3 >= 3
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_pePe(Succ(vx550), Succ(vx560), vx57) → new_pePe(vx550, vx560, vx57)
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_pePe(Succ(vx550), Succ(vx560), vx57) → new_pePe(vx550, vx560, vx57)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2, 3 >= 3
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_pePe0(Succ(vx530), Succ(vx540), vx55, vx56, vx57) → new_pePe0(vx530, vx540, vx55, vx56, vx57)
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_pePe0(Succ(vx530), Succ(vx540), vx55, vx56, vx57) → new_pePe0(vx530, vx540, vx55, vx56, vx57)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2, 3 >= 3, 4 >= 4, 5 >= 5