Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[N, X, Y, X1, X2, XS]
fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

FIB(N) -> SEL(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
FIB(N) -> FIB1(s(0), s(0))
FIB1(X, Y) -> ADD(X, Y)
ADD(s(X), Y) -> ADD(X, Y)
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> SEL(N, activate(XS))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> ACTIVATE(XS)
ACTIVATE(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> FIB1(X1, X2)

Furthermore, R contains two SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

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 3

             ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

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 3

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 4

                 ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

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 that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

ADD(x₁, x₂) -> ADD(x₁, x₂)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

           →DP Problem 3

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 5

                 ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pair:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> SEL(N, activate(XS))

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
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(N), cons(X, XS)) -> SEL(N, activate(XS))

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1', X2'))) -> SEL(N, fib1(X1', X2'))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS')) -> SEL(N, XS')

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS')) -> SEL(N, XS')
SEL(s(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1', X2'))) -> SEL(N, fib1(X1', X2'))

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
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(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1', X2'))) -> SEL(N, fib1(X1', X2'))

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1'', X2''))) -> SEL(N, cons(X1'', n_{_fib1}(X2'', add(X1'', X2''))))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1'', X2''))) -> SEL(N, n_{_fib1}(X1'', X2''))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 7

                 ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pairs:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1'', X2''))) -> SEL(N, cons(X1'', n_{_fib1}(X2'', add(X1'', X2''))))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS')) -> SEL(N, XS')

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Strategy:

innermost

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

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS')) -> SEL(N, XS')

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

SEL(s(s(N'')), cons(X, cons(X'', XS'''))) -> SEL(s(N''), cons(X'', XS'''))
SEL(s(s(N'')), cons(X, cons(X'', n_{_fib1}(X1'''', X2'''')))) -> SEL(s(N''), cons(X'', n_{_fib1}(X1'''', X2'''')))

The transformation is resulting in two new DP problems:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 8

                 ↳Remaining Obligation(s)

The following remains to be proven:
Dependency Pair:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, n_{_fib1}(X1'', X2''))) -> SEL(N, cons(X1'', n_{_fib1}(X2'', add(X1'', X2''))))

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Strategy:

innermost

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 9

                 ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

Dependency Pair:

SEL(s(s(N'')), cons(X, cons(X'', XS'''))) -> SEL(s(N''), cons(X'', XS'''))

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

SEL(s(s(N'')), cons(X, cons(X'', XS'''))) -> SEL(s(N''), cons(X'', XS'''))

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:

SEL(x₁, x₂) -> SEL(x₁, x₂)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)
cons(x₁, x₂) -> cons(x₁, x₂)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 10

                 ↳Dependency Graph

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

fib(N) -> sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) -> cons(X, n_{_fib1}(Y, add(X, Y)))
fib1(X1, X2) -> n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) -> X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> sel(N, activate(XS))
activate(n_{_fib1}(X1, X2)) -> fib1(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

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