Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y, z, l]
+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

+'(s(x), s(y)) -> +'(x, y)
+'(+(x, y), z) -> +'(x, +(y, z))
+'(+(x, y), z) -> +'(y, z)
*'(s(x), s(y)) -> +'(*(x, y), +(x, y))
*'(s(x), s(y)) -> *'(x, y)
*'(s(x), s(y)) -> +'(x, y)
*'(*(x, y), z) -> *'(x, *(y, z))
*'(*(x, y), z) -> *'(y, z)
SUM(cons(x, l)) -> +'(x, sum(l))
SUM(cons(x, l)) -> SUM(l)
PROD(cons(x, l)) -> *'(x, prod(l))
PROD(cons(x, l)) -> PROD(l)

Furthermore, R contains four SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pairs:

+'(+(x, y), z) -> +'(y, z)
+'(+(x, y), z) -> +'(x, +(y, z))
+'(s(x), s(y)) -> +'(x, y)

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pairs can be strictly oriented:

+'(+(x, y), z) -> +'(y, z)
+'(+(x, y), z) -> +'(x, +(y, z))
+'(s(x), s(y)) -> +'(x, y)

The following usable rules for innermost can be oriented:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))

Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

{+', +} > s

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

+'(x₁, x₂) -> +'(x₁, x₂)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)
+(x₁, x₂) -> +(x₁, x₂)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 5

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

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

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pairs:

*'(*(x, y), z) -> *'(y, z)
*'(*(x, y), z) -> *'(x, *(y, z))
*'(s(x), s(y)) -> *'(x, y)

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pairs can be strictly oriented:

*'(*(x, y), z) -> *'(y, z)
*'(*(x, y), z) -> *'(x, *(y, z))
*'(s(x), s(y)) -> *'(x, y)

The following usable rules for innermost can be oriented:

*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))

Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

*' > * > + > s

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

*'(x₁, x₂) -> *'(x₁, x₂)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)
*(x₁, x₂) -> *(x₁, x₂)
+(x₁, x₂) -> +(x₁, x₂)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

SUM(cons(x, l)) -> SUM(l)

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

SUM(cons(x, l)) -> SUM(l)

There are no usable rules for innermost that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

trivial

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

SUM(x₁) -> SUM(x₁)
cons(x₁, x₂) -> cons(x₁, x₂)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 7

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

Dependency Pair:

PROD(cons(x, l)) -> PROD(l)

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

PROD(cons(x, l)) -> PROD(l)

There are no usable rules for innermost that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

trivial

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

PROD(x₁) -> PROD(x₁)
cons(x₁, x₂) -> cons(x₁, x₂)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 8

             ↳Dependency Graph

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

+(x, 0) -> x
+(0, x) -> x
+(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) -> +(x, +(y, z))
*(x, 0) -> 0
*(0, x) -> 0
*(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y)))
*(*(x, y), z) -> *(x, *(y, z))
sum(nil) -> 0
sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l))
prod(nil) -> s(0)
prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

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