Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[N, X, Y]
terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

TERMS(N) -> SQR(N)
SQR(s(X)) -> ADD(sqr(X), dbl(X))
SQR(s(X)) -> SQR(X)
SQR(s(X)) -> DBL(X)
DBL(s(X)) -> DBL(X)
ADD(s(X), Y) -> ADD(X, Y)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

ADD(s(X), Y) -> ADD(X, Y)

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

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

ADD(s(X), Y) -> ADD(X, Y)

one new Dependency Pair is created:

ADD(s(s(X'')), Y'') -> ADD(s(X''), 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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

ADD(s(s(X'')), Y'') -> ADD(s(X''), Y'')

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

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

ADD(s(s(X'')), Y'') -> ADD(s(X''), Y'')

one new Dependency Pair is created:

ADD(s(s(s(X''''))), Y'''') -> ADD(s(s(X'''')), 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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

ADD(s(s(s(X''''))), Y'''') -> ADD(s(s(X'''')), Y'''')

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

ADD(s(s(s(X''''))), Y'''') -> ADD(s(s(X'''')), 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(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

POL(ADD(x₁, x₂)) = 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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

DBL(s(X)) -> DBL(X)

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

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

DBL(s(X)) -> DBL(X)

one new Dependency Pair is created:

DBL(s(s(X''))) -> DBL(s(X''))

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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

DBL(s(s(X''))) -> DBL(s(X''))

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

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

DBL(s(s(X''))) -> DBL(s(X''))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

DBL(s(s(s(X'''')))) -> DBL(s(s(X'''')))

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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

DBL(s(s(s(X'''')))) -> DBL(s(s(X'''')))

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

DBL(s(s(s(X'''')))) -> DBL(s(s(X'''')))

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(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

POL(DBL(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

         ↳FwdInst

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(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

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

SQR(s(X)) -> SQR(X)

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

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

SQR(s(X)) -> SQR(X)

one new Dependency Pair is created:

SQR(s(s(X''))) -> SQR(s(X''))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

SQR(s(s(X''))) -> SQR(s(X''))

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

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

SQR(s(s(X''))) -> SQR(s(X''))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

SQR(s(s(s(X'''')))) -> SQR(s(s(X'''')))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 11

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

Dependency Pair:

SQR(s(s(s(X'''')))) -> SQR(s(s(X'''')))

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

SQR(s(s(s(X'''')))) -> SQR(s(s(X'''')))

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(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

POL(SQR(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 12

                 ↳Dependency Graph

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)))
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y)) -> cons(Y)

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

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

POL(s(x₁))	= 1 + x₁
POL(ADD(x₁, x₂))	= 1 + x₁