Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y, z]
minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x, y), s(y)))
plus(0, y) -> y
plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y))
plus(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown. 



   R
     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis



R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

MINUS(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)
QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> QUOT(minus(x, y), s(y))
QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)
PLUS(s(x), y) -> PLUS(x, y)
PLUS(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) -> PLUS(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
PLUS(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) -> PLUS(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs. 


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳UsableRules


Dependency Pair:

MINUS(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x, y), s(y)))
plus(0, y) -> y
plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y))
plus(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))


Strategy:

innermost




As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 8 non-usable-rules.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳UsableRules
           →DP Problem 4
             ↳Size-Change Principle
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳UsableRules


Dependency Pair:

MINUS(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)


Rule:

none


Strategy:

innermost




We number the DPs as follows:
  1. MINUS(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1
2>2

which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1
2>2

DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none

We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial

with Argument Filtering System:
s(x1) -> s(x1)

We obtain no new DP problems. 


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳UsableRules


Dependency Pair:

QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> QUOT(minus(x, y), s(y))


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x, y), s(y)))
plus(0, y) -> y
plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y))
plus(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))


Strategy:

innermost




As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 6 non-usable-rules.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳UsableRules
           →DP Problem 5
             ↳Negative Polynomial Order
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳UsableRules


Dependency Pair:

QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> QUOT(minus(x, y), s(y))


Rules:


minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
minus(x, 0) -> x


Strategy:

innermost




The following Dependency Pair can be strictly oriented using the given order.

QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> QUOT(minus(x, y), s(y))


Moreover, the following usable rules (regarding the implicit AFS) are oriented.

minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
minus(x, 0) -> x


Used ordering:
Polynomial Order with Interpretation:

POL( QUOT(x1, x2) ) = x1

POL( s(x1) ) = x1 + 1

POL( minus(x1, x2) ) = x1


This results in one new DP problem. 


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳UsableRules
           →DP Problem 5
             ↳Neg POLO
             ...
               →DP Problem 6
                 ↳Dependency Graph
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳UsableRules


Dependency Pair:


Rules:


minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
minus(x, 0) -> x


Strategy:

innermost




Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)


Dependency Pair:

PLUS(s(x), y) -> PLUS(x, y)


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x, y), s(y)))
plus(0, y) -> y
plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y))
plus(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) -> plus(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))


Strategy:

innermost




As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 8 non-usable-rules.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳UsableRules
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳UsableRules
           →DP Problem 7
             ↳Size-Change Principle


Dependency Pair:

PLUS(s(x), y) -> PLUS(x, y)


Rule:

none


Strategy:

innermost




We number the DPs as follows:
  1. PLUS(s(x), y) -> PLUS(x, y)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1
2=2

which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1
2=2

DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none

We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial

with Argument Filtering System:
s(x1) -> s(x1)

We obtain no new DP problems.

Innermost Termination of R successfully shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes