Term Rewriting System R:
[X, Y, Z]
f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X

Innermost Termination of R to be shown. 



   R
     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis



R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

G(s(X)) -> G(X)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> SEL(X, activate(Z))
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> ACTIVATE(Z)
ACTIVATE(nf(X)) -> F(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(nf(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(ng(X)) -> G(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(ng(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs. 


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Nar


Dependency Pair:

G(s(X)) -> G(X)


Rules:


f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X


Strategy:

innermost




The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

G(s(X)) -> G(X)


There are no usable rules for innermost that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:
G(x1) -> G(x1)
s(x1) -> s(x1)


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳AFS
           →DP Problem 4
             ↳Dependency Graph
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Nar


Dependency Pair:


Rules:


f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X


Strategy:

innermost




Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Nar


Dependency Pairs:

ACTIVATE(ng(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(nf(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X)


Rules:


f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X


Strategy:

innermost




The following dependency pairs can be strictly oriented:

ACTIVATE(ng(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(nf(X)) -> ACTIVATE(X)


There are no usable rules for innermost that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:
ACTIVATE(x1) -> ACTIVATE(x1)
ng(x1) -> ng(x1)
nf(x1) -> nf(x1)


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳AFS
           →DP Problem 5
             ↳Dependency Graph
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Nar


Dependency Pair:


Rules:


f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X


Strategy:

innermost




Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Narrowing Transformation


Dependency Pair:

SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> SEL(X, activate(Z))


Rules:


f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X


Strategy:

innermost




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

SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> SEL(X, activate(Z))
three new Dependency Pairs are created:

SEL(s(X), cons(Y, nf(X''))) -> SEL(X, f(activate(X'')))
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, ng(X''))) -> SEL(X, g(activate(X'')))
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z')) -> SEL(X, Z')

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem: 



   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳AFS
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Nar
           →DP Problem 6
             ↳Remaining Obligation(s)




The following remains to be proven:
Dependency Pairs:

SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z')) -> SEL(X, Z')
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, ng(X''))) -> SEL(X, g(activate(X'')))
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, nf(X''))) -> SEL(X, f(activate(X'')))


Rules:


f(X) -> cons(X, nf(ng(X)))
f(X) -> nf(X)
g(0) -> s(0)
g(s(X)) -> s(s(g(X)))
g(X) -> ng(X)
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) -> X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(nf(X)) -> f(activate(X))
activate(ng(X)) -> g(activate(X))
activate(X) -> X


Strategy:

innermost



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