Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[X]
active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

ACTIVE(g(X)) -> H(X)
ACTIVE(h(d)) -> G(c)
PROPER(g(X)) -> G(proper(X))
PROPER(g(X)) -> PROPER(X)
PROPER(h(X)) -> H(proper(X))
PROPER(h(X)) -> PROPER(X)
G(ok(X)) -> G(X)
H(ok(X)) -> H(X)
TOP(mark(X)) -> TOP(proper(X))
TOP(mark(X)) -> PROPER(X)
TOP(ok(X)) -> TOP(active(X))
TOP(ok(X)) -> ACTIVE(X)

Furthermore, R contains four SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining

Dependency Pair:

G(ok(X)) -> G(X)

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

G(ok(X)) -> G(X)

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the AFS 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:

G(x₁) -> G(x₁)
ok(x₁) -> ok(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 5

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(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

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining

Dependency Pair:

H(ok(X)) -> H(X)

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

H(ok(X)) -> H(X)

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the AFS 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:

H(x₁) -> H(x₁)
ok(x₁) -> ok(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(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

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining

Dependency Pairs:

PROPER(h(X)) -> PROPER(X)
PROPER(g(X)) -> PROPER(X)

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pairs can be strictly oriented:

PROPER(h(X)) -> PROPER(X)
PROPER(g(X)) -> PROPER(X)

There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the AFS 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:

PROPER(x₁) -> PROPER(x₁)
h(x₁) -> h(x₁)
g(x₁) -> g(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 7

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(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

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Remaining Obligation(s)

The following remains to be proven:
Dependency Pairs:

TOP(ok(X)) -> TOP(active(X))
TOP(mark(X)) -> TOP(proper(X))

Rules:

active(g(X)) -> mark(h(X))
active(c) -> mark(d)
active(h(d)) -> mark(g(c))
proper(g(X)) -> g(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) -> h(proper(X))
proper(c) -> ok(c)
proper(d) -> ok(d)
g(ok(X)) -> ok(g(X))
h(ok(X)) -> ok(h(X))
top(mark(X)) -> top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) -> top(active(X))

Strategy:

innermost

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