YES 0.706 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
  ↳ LR

mainModule Main
  ((zip :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)]) :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)])

module Main where
  import qualified Prelude



Lambda Reductions:
The following Lambda expression
\ab→(a,b)

is transformed to
zip0 a b = (a,b)



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ LR
HASKELL
      ↳ BR

mainModule Main
  ((zip :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)]) :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)])

module Main where
  import qualified Prelude



Replaced joker patterns by fresh variables and removed binding patterns.

↳ HASKELL
  ↳ LR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ BR
HASKELL
          ↳ COR

mainModule Main
  ((zip :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)]) :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)])

module Main where
  import qualified Prelude



Cond Reductions:
The following Function with conditions
undefined 
 | False
 = undefined

is transformed to
undefined  = undefined1

undefined0 True = undefined

undefined1  = undefined0 False



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ LR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ BR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ COR
HASKELL
              ↳ Narrow

mainModule Main
  (zip :: [b ->  [a ->  [(b,a)])

module Main where
  import qualified Prelude



Haskell To QDPs


↳ HASKELL
  ↳ LR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ BR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ COR
            ↳ HASKELL
              ↳ Narrow
QDP
                  ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

new_zipWith(:(wu30, wu31), :(wu40, wu41), ba, bb) → new_zipWith(wu31, wu41, 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: