Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[y, x]
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(x, y)
MINUS(s(x), y) -> IF_MINUS(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
MINUS(s(x), y) -> LE(s(x), y)
IF_MINUS(false, s(x), y) -> MINUS(x, y)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) -> IF_MOD(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
MOD(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(y, x)
IF_MOD(true, s(x), s(y)) -> MOD(minus(x, y), s(y))
IF_MOD(true, s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the AFS that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

LE(x₁, x₂) -> LE(x₁, x₂)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 4

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pairs:

IF_MINUS(false, s(x), y) -> MINUS(x, y)
MINUS(s(x), y) -> IF_MINUS(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

MINUS(x₁, x₂) -> x₁
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)
IF_MINUS(x₁, x₂, x₃) -> x₂

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 5

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

IF_MOD(true, s(x), s(y)) -> MOD(minus(x, y), s(y))
MOD(s(x), s(y)) -> IF_MOD(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

On this DP problem, a Narrowing SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule

MOD(s(x), s(y)) -> IF_MOD(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))

three new Dependency Pairs are created:

MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))
MOD(s(0), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(false, s(0), s(s(x'')))
MOD(s(s(y'')), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(le(x'', y''), s(s(y'')), s(s(x'')))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

MOD(s(s(y'')), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(le(x'', y''), s(s(y'')), s(s(x'')))
MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))
IF_MOD(true, s(x), s(y)) -> MOD(minus(x, y), s(y))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

On this DP problem, a Narrowing SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule

IF_MOD(true, s(x), s(y)) -> MOD(minus(x, y), s(y))

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

IF_MOD(true, s(0), s(y'')) -> MOD(0, s(y''))
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'')), s(y'')) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''), y''), s(x''), y''), s(y''))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 7

                 ↳Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'')), s(y'')) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''), y''), s(x''), y''), s(y''))
MOD(s(s(y'')), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(le(x'', y''), s(s(y'')), s(s(x'')))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

On this DP problem, an Instantiation SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'')), s(y'')) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''), y''), s(x''), y''), s(y''))

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''''), 0), s(x''''), 0), s(0))
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(s(x'''''))) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(s(x''''')))

The transformation is resulting in two new DP problems:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 8

                 ↳Rewriting Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''''), 0), s(x''''), 0), s(0))
MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

On this DP problem, a Rewriting SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''''), 0), s(x''''), 0), s(0))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(if_minus(false, s(x''''), 0), s(0))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 10

                 ↳Rewriting Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(if_minus(false, s(x''''), 0), s(0))
MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

On this DP problem, a Rewriting SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(if_minus(false, s(x''''), 0), s(0))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(s(minus(x'''', 0)), s(0))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 12

                 ↳Remaining Obligation(s)

The following remains to be proven:

Dependency Pairs:
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(s(x'''''))) -> MOD(if_minus(le(x'''', x'''''), s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(s(x''''')))
MOD(s(s(y'')), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(le(x'', y''), s(s(y'')), s(s(x'')))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:
innermost
Dependency Pairs:
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(s(minus(x'''', 0)), s(0))
MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:
innermost

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 9

                 ↳Rewriting Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(s(x'''''))) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(s(x''''')))
MOD(s(s(y'')), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(le(x'', y''), s(s(y'')), s(s(x'')))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:

innermost

On this DP problem, a Rewriting SCC transformation can be performed.
As a result of transforming the rule

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(s(x'''''))) -> MOD(if_minus(le(s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(s(x''''')))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(s(x'''''))) -> MOD(if_minus(le(x'''', x'''''), s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(s(x''''')))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 12

                 ↳Remaining Obligation(s)

The following remains to be proven:

Dependency Pairs:
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(s(x'''''))) -> MOD(if_minus(le(x'''', x'''''), s(x''''), s(x''''')), s(s(x''''')))
MOD(s(s(y'')), s(s(x''))) -> IF_MOD(le(x'', y''), s(s(y'')), s(s(x'')))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:
innermost
Dependency Pairs:
IF_MOD(true, s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> MOD(s(minus(x'''', 0)), s(0))
MOD(s(x'), s(0)) -> IF_MOD(true, s(x'), s(0))

Rules:

le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
minus(0, y) -> 0
minus(s(x), y) -> if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) -> 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) -> s(minus(x, y))
mod(0, y) -> 0
mod(s(x), 0) -> 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_mod(true, s(x), s(y)) -> mod(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_mod(false, s(x), s(y)) -> s(x)

Strategy:
innermost

Innermost Termination of R could not be shown.
Duration:
0:01 minutes