MAYBE 17.712
H-Termination proof of /home/matraf/haskell/eval_FullyBlown_Fast/empty.hs
H-Termination of the given Haskell-Program with start terms could not be shown:
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
mainModule Main
| ((ceiling :: Float -> Int) :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
Lambda Reductions:
The following Lambda expression
\(_,r)→r
is transformed to
The following Lambda expression
\(n,_)→n
is transformed to
The following Lambda expression
\(_,r)→r
is transformed to
The following Lambda expression
\(q,_)→q
is transformed to
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
mainModule Main
| ((ceiling :: Float -> Int) :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
If Reductions:
The following If expression
if r > 0 then n + 1 else n
is transformed to
ceiling0 | True | = n + 1 |
ceiling0 | False | = n |
The following If expression
if primGEqNatS x y then Succ (primDivNatS (primMinusNatS x y) (Succ y)) else Zero
is transformed to
primDivNatS0 | x y True | = Succ (primDivNatS (primMinusNatS x y) (Succ y)) |
primDivNatS0 | x y False | = Zero |
The following If expression
if primGEqNatS x y then primModNatS (primMinusNatS x y) (Succ y) else Succ x
is transformed to
primModNatS0 | x y True | = primModNatS (primMinusNatS x y) (Succ y) |
primModNatS0 | x y False | = Succ x |
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
mainModule Main
| ((ceiling :: Float -> Int) :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
Replaced joker patterns by fresh variables and removed binding patterns.
Binding Reductions:
The bind variable of the following binding Pattern
frac@(Double vz wu)
is replaced by the following term
Double vz wu
The bind variable of the following binding Pattern
frac@(Float wx wy)
is replaced by the following term
Float wx wy
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
mainModule Main
| ((ceiling :: Float -> Int) :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
Cond Reductions:
The following Function with conditions
is transformed to
undefined0 | True | = undefined |
undefined1 | | = undefined0 False |
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
mainModule Main
| ((ceiling :: Float -> Int) :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
Let/Where Reductions:
The bindings of the following Let/Where expression
ceiling0 (r > 0) |
where |
ceiling0 | True | = n + 1 |
ceiling0 | False | = n |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
are unpacked to the following functions on top level
ceilingVu8 | xx | = properFraction xx |
ceilingR | xx | = ceilingR0 xx (ceilingVu8 xx) |
ceilingCeiling0 | xx True | = ceilingN xx + 1 |
ceilingCeiling0 | xx False | = ceilingN xx |
ceilingN | xx | = ceilingN0 xx (ceilingVu8 xx) |
The bindings of the following Let/Where expression
(fromIntegral q,r :% y) |
where | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
are unpacked to the following functions on top level
properFractionQ1 | xy xz (q,xu) | = q |
properFractionR1 | xy xz (xv,r) | = r |
properFractionR | xy xz | = properFractionR1 xy xz (properFractionVu30 xy xz) |
properFractionVu30 | xy xz | = quotRem xy xz |
properFractionQ | xy xz | = properFractionQ1 xy xz (properFractionVu30 xy xz) |
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
mainModule Main
| ((ceiling :: Float -> Int) :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
Num Reduction: All numbers are transformed to thier corresponding representation with Pos, Neg, Succ and Zero.
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ Narrow
mainModule Main
| (ceiling :: Float -> Int) |
module Main where
Haskell To QDPs
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primPlusNat(Succ(yu300000000), Succ(yu4340000)) → new_primPlusNat(yu300000000, yu4340000)
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_primPlusNat(Succ(yu300000000), Succ(yu4340000)) → new_primPlusNat(yu300000000, yu4340000)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primMinusNat(Succ(yu4060), Succ(yu3900)) → new_primMinusNat(yu4060, yu3900)
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_primMinusNat(Succ(yu4060), Succ(yu3900)) → new_primMinusNat(yu4060, yu3900)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primMulNat(Succ(yu1130)) → new_primMulNat(yu1130)
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_primMulNat(Succ(yu1130)) → new_primMulNat(yu1130)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425) → new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425)
new_primDivNatS1(Succ(yu4880), Succ(yu4890), yu490) → new_primDivNatS1(yu4880, yu4890, yu490)
new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000) → new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000)
new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, Succ(yu4960), Zero) → new_primDivNatS01(yu494, Succ(yu495))
new_primDivNatS0(Succ(yu30000), Succ(yu31000)) → new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000)
new_primDivNatS0(Succ(yu30000), Zero) → new_primDivNatS01(yu30000, Zero)
new_primDivNatS0(Zero, Zero) → new_primDivNatS02
new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, Succ(yu4960), Succ(yu4970)) → new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, yu4960, yu4970)
new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, Zero, Zero) → new_primDivNatS01(yu494, Succ(yu495))
new_primDivNatS01(yu424, yu425) → new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425)
new_primDivNatS02 → new_primDivNatS1(Zero, Zero, Zero)
new_primDivNatS1(Succ(yu4880), Zero, yu490) → new_primDivNatS2(yu4880, yu490)
new_primDivNatS2(yu451, yu452) → new_primDivNatS0(yu451, yu452)
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 4 SCCs with 9 less nodes.
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ NonTerminationProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000) → new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We used the non-termination processor [17] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly.
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000) → new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:none
s = new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000) evaluates to t =new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000)
Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Semiunifier: [ ]
- Matcher: [ ]
Rewriting sequence
The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000) to new_primDivNatS00(yu30000, yu31000).
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ NonTerminationProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425) → new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We used the non-termination processor [17] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly.
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425) → new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:none
s = new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425) evaluates to t =new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425)
Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Semiunifier: [ ]
- Matcher: [ ]
Rewriting sequence
The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425) to new_primDivNatS(yu424, yu425).
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS1(Succ(yu4880), Succ(yu4890), yu490) → new_primDivNatS1(yu4880, yu4890, yu490)
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_primDivNatS1(Succ(yu4880), Succ(yu4890), yu490) → new_primDivNatS1(yu4880, yu4890, yu490)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2, 3 >= 3
↳ HASKELL
↳ LR
↳ HASKELL
↳ IFR
↳ HASKELL
↳ BR
↳ HASKELL
↳ COR
↳ HASKELL
↳ LetRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ NumRed
↳ HASKELL
↳ Narrow
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ Narrow
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, Succ(yu4960), Succ(yu4970)) → new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, yu4960, yu4970)
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_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, Succ(yu4960), Succ(yu4970)) → new_primDivNatS03(yu494, yu495, yu4960, yu4970)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 >= 2, 3 > 3, 4 > 4
Haskell To QDPs