Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y]
minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y)))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown. 



   R
     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis



R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

MINUS(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(x, y)
LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(x, y)
QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> QUOT(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y))
QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(s(x), s(y))

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs. 


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Polynomial Ordering
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Polo
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Remaining


Dependency Pair:

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


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y)))


Strategy:

innermost




The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

MINUS(s(x), s(y)) -> MINUS(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(MINUS(x1, x2))=  x1  
  POL(s(x1))=  1 + x1  

resulting in one new DP problem. 



   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Polo
           →DP Problem 4
             ↳Dependency Graph
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Polo
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Remaining


Dependency Pair:


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y)))


Strategy:

innermost




Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Polo
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Polynomial Ordering
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Remaining


Dependency Pair:

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


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y)))


Strategy:

innermost




The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

LE(s(x), s(y)) -> LE(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(LE(x1, x2))=  x1  
  POL(s(x1))=  1 + x1  

resulting in one new DP problem. 



   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Polo
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Polo
           →DP Problem 5
             ↳Dependency Graph
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Remaining


Dependency Pair:


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y)))


Strategy:

innermost




Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.


   R
     ↳DPs
       →DP Problem 1
         ↳Polo
       →DP Problem 2
         ↳Polo
       →DP Problem 3
         ↳Remaining Obligation(s)




The following remains to be proven:
Dependency Pair:

QUOT(s(x), s(y)) -> QUOT(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y))


Rules:


minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)
le(0, y) -> true
le(s(x), 0) -> false
le(s(x), s(y)) -> le(x, y)
quot(0, s(y)) -> 0
quot(s(x), s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(s(x), s(y)), s(y)))


Strategy:

innermost



Innermost Termination of R could not be shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes