Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y]
-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

-'(s(x), s(y)) -> -'(x, y)
LT(s(x), s(y)) -> LT(x, y)
DIV(s(x), s(y)) -> IF(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))
DIV(s(x), s(y)) -> LT(x, y)
DIV(s(x), s(y)) -> DIV(-(x, y), s(y))
DIV(s(x), s(y)) -> -'(x, y)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 4

             ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 4

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 5

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the implicit AFS that need to be oriented.

Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:

POL(-'(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 4

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 6

                 ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

LT(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> LT(s(x''), s(y''))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 7

             ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

LT(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> LT(s(x''), s(y''))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

LT(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> LT(s(x''), s(y''))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

LT(s(s(s(x''''))), s(s(s(y'''')))) -> LT(s(s(x'''')), s(s(y'''')))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 7

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 8

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

LT(s(s(s(x''''))), s(s(s(y'''')))) -> LT(s(s(x'''')), s(s(y'''')))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

LT(s(s(s(x''''))), s(s(s(y'''')))) -> LT(s(s(x'''')), s(s(y'''')))

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the implicit AFS that need to be oriented.

Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:

POL(LT(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 7

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 9

                 ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

three new Dependency Pairs are created:

DIV(s(x''), s(0)) -> DIV(x'', s(0))
DIV(s(0), s(s(y''))) -> DIV(0, s(s(y'')))
DIV(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> DIV(-(x'', y''), s(s(y'')))

The transformation is resulting in two new DP problems:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

           →DP Problem 11

             ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(x''), s(0)) -> DIV(x'', s(0))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

DIV(s(x''), s(0)) -> DIV(x'', s(0))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

DIV(s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> DIV(s(x''''), s(0))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 12

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

           →DP Problem 11

             ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> DIV(s(x''''), s(0))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

DIV(s(s(x'''')), s(0)) -> DIV(s(x''''), s(0))

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the implicit AFS that need to be oriented.

Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:

POL(0) = 0

POL(DIV(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 15

                 ↳Dependency Graph

           →DP Problem 11

             ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 11

             ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> DIV(-(x'', y''), s(s(y'')))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

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

DIV(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> DIV(-(x'', y''), s(s(y'')))

three new Dependency Pairs are created:

DIV(s(s(x''')), s(s(0))) -> DIV(x''', s(s(0)))
DIV(s(s(0)), s(s(s(y')))) -> DIV(0, s(s(s(y'))))
DIV(s(s(s(x'))), s(s(s(y')))) -> DIV(-(x', y'), s(s(s(y'))))

The transformation is resulting in two new DP problems:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 11

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 13

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(s(x''')), s(s(0))) -> DIV(x''', s(s(0)))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

DIV(s(s(x''')), s(s(0))) -> DIV(x''', s(s(0)))

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the implicit AFS that need to be oriented.

Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:

POL(0) = 0

POL(DIV(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 11

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 14

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(s(s(x'))), s(s(s(y')))) -> DIV(-(x', y'), s(s(s(y'))))

Rules:

-(x, 0) -> x
-(0, s(y)) -> 0
-(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y)
lt(x, 0) -> false
lt(0, s(y)) -> true
lt(s(x), s(y)) -> lt(x, y)
if(true, x, y) -> x
if(false, x, y) -> y
div(x, 0) -> 0
div(0, y) -> 0
div(s(x), s(y)) -> if(lt(x, y), 0, s(div(-(x, y), s(y))))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

DIV(s(s(s(x'))), s(s(s(y')))) -> DIV(-(x', y'), s(s(s(y'))))

Additionally, the following usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the implicit AFS can be oriented:

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

Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:

POL(0) = 0

POL(DIV(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

POL(-(x₁, x₂)) = x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

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

POL(0)	= 0
POL(DIV(x₁, x₂))	= 1 + x₁
POL(s(x₁))	= 1 + x₁

POL(0)	= 0
POL(DIV(x₁, x₂))	= 1 + x₁ + x₂
POL(s(x₁))	= 1 + x₁
POL(-(x₁, x₂))	= x₁