Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y, l, l1, l2, l3]
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) -> l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) -> cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) -> false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) -> ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) -> true
ifmem(false, x, l) -> mem(x, l)
inter(x, nil) -> nil
inter(nil, x) -> nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) -> ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) -> cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) -> inter(l1, l2)
Innermost Termination of R to be shown.
R
↳Dependency Pair Analysis
R contains the following Dependency Pairs:
EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y)
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) -> APP(l1, l2)
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) -> APP(l1, app(l2, l3))
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) -> APP(l2, l3)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) -> IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) -> EQ(x, y)
IFMEM(false, x, l) -> MEM(x, l)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> APP(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l1, l3)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l2, l3)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> APP(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l3)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) -> MEM(x, l2)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> MEM(x, l1)
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
Furthermore, R contains four SCCs.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y)
Rules:
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) -> l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) -> cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) -> false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) -> ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) -> true
ifmem(false, x, l) -> mem(x, l)
inter(x, nil) -> nil
inter(nil, x) -> nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) -> ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) -> cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) -> inter(l1, l2)
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 21 non-usable-rules.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 5
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pair:
EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- EQ(s(x), s(y)) -> EQ(x, y)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
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
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pairs:
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) -> APP(l2, l3)
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) -> APP(l1, l2)
Rules:
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) -> l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) -> cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) -> false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) -> ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) -> true
ifmem(false, x, l) -> mem(x, l)
inter(x, nil) -> nil
inter(nil, x) -> nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) -> ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) -> cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) -> inter(l1, l2)
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 21 non-usable-rules.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 6
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pairs:
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) -> APP(l2, l3)
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) -> APP(l1, l2)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- APP(app(l1, l2), l3) -> APP(l2, l3)
- APP(cons(x, l1), l2) -> APP(l1, l2)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
app(x1, x2) -> app(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pairs:
IFMEM(false, x, l) -> MEM(x, l)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) -> IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
Rules:
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) -> l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) -> cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) -> false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) -> ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) -> true
ifmem(false, x, l) -> mem(x, l)
inter(x, nil) -> nil
inter(nil, x) -> nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) -> ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) -> cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) -> inter(l1, l2)
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 17 non-usable-rules.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 7
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pairs:
IFMEM(false, x, l) -> MEM(x, l)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) -> IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
Rules:
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- IFMEM(false, x, l) -> MEM(x, l)
- MEM(x, cons(y, l)) -> IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 4
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
Dependency Pairs:
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l3)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l2, l3)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l1, l3)
Rules:
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) -> l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) -> cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) -> false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) -> ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) -> true
ifmem(false, x, l) -> mem(x, l)
inter(x, nil) -> nil
inter(nil, x) -> nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) -> app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) -> ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) -> cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) -> inter(l1, l2)
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 13 non-usable-rules.
R
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 3
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 4
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 8
↳Size-Change Principle
Dependency Pairs:
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l3)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l2, l3)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l1, l3)
Rules:
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(s(x), s(y)) -> eq(x, y)
eq(s(x), 0) -> false
eq(0, s(x)) -> false
ifmem(true, x, l) -> true
ifmem(false, x, l) -> mem(x, l)
mem(x, nil) -> false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) -> ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
- INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
- IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) -> INTER(l1, l2)
- INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) -> IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
- INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l3)
- INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l2, l3)
- INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) -> INTER(l1, l2)
- INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) -> INTER(l1, l3)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
app(x1, x2) -> app(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
Innermost Termination of R successfully shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes