YES 3.079 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
  ((index :: (Int,Int ->  Int  ->  Int) :: (Int,Int ->  Int  ->  Int)

module Main where
  import qualified Prelude



Replaced joker patterns by fresh variables and removed binding patterns.
Binding Reductions:
The bind variable of the following binding Pattern
b@(vw,vx)

is replaced by the following term
(vw,vx)



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
HASKELL
      ↳ COR

mainModule Main
  ((index :: (Int,Int ->  Int  ->  Int) :: (Int,Int ->  Int  ->  Int)

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

The following Function with conditions
index (vw,vxi
 | inRange (vw,vxi
 = i - vw
 | otherwise
 = error []

is transformed to
index (vw,vxi = index2 (vw,vxi

index1 vw vx i True = i - vw
index1 vw vx i False = index0 vw vx i otherwise

index0 vw vx i True = error []

index2 (vw,vxi = index1 vw vx i (inRange (vw,vxi)



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow

mainModule Main
  (index :: (Int,Int ->  Int  ->  Int)

module Main where
  import qualified Prelude



Haskell To QDPs


↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_primPlusNat(Succ(wu980), Succ(wu960)) → new_primPlusNat(wu980, wu960)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_primMinusNat(Succ(wu580), Succ(wu600)) → new_primMinusNat(wu580, wu600)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_index1(wu110, wu111, Succ(wu1120), Succ(wu1130)) → new_index1(wu110, wu111, wu1120, wu1130)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_index10(wu149, wu150, wu151, Succ(wu1520), Succ(wu1530)) → new_index10(wu149, wu150, wu151, wu1520, wu1530)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_index11(wu58, wu59, wu60, Succ(wu610), Succ(wu620)) → new_index11(wu58, wu59, wu60, wu610, wu620)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_index12(wu96, wu97, wu98, Succ(wu990), Succ(wu1000)) → new_index12(wu96, wu97, wu98, wu990, wu1000)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

new_index13(wu105, wu106, Succ(wu1070), Succ(wu1080)) → new_index13(wu105, wu106, wu1070, wu1080)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
              ↳ QDP

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

new_index14(wu115, wu116, wu117, Succ(wu1180), Succ(wu1190)) → new_index14(wu115, wu116, wu117, wu1180, wu1190)

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:



↳ HASKELL
  ↳ BR
    ↳ HASKELL
      ↳ COR
        ↳ HASKELL
          ↳ Narrow
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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

new_index15(wu35, wu36, wu37, Succ(wu380), Succ(wu390)) → new_index15(wu35, wu36, wu37, wu380, wu390)

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: