Termination Proof using AProVE

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.

     ↳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.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rw

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

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

         ↳Rw

Dependency Pair:

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

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

         ↳Rw

Dependency Pair:

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

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

POL(s(x₁)) = 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

         ↳Rw

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.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rw

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

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

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

         ↳Rw

Dependency Pair:

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

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

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

         ↳Rw

Dependency Pair:

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

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

POL(s(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

         ↳Rw

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.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rewriting Transformation

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

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rw

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pair:

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

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

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

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

QUOT(s(x''), s(0)) -> QUOT(x'', s(0))
QUOT(s(s(x'')), s(s(y''))) -> QUOT(minus(x'', y''), s(s(y'')))

The transformation is resulting in two new DP problems:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rw

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 11

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

Dependency Pair:

QUOT(s(x''), s(0)) -> QUOT(x'', s(0))

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:

QUOT(s(x''), s(0)) -> QUOT(x'', s(0))

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(QUOT(x₁, x₂)) = x₁

POL(0) = 0

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rw

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 13

                 ↳Dependency Graph

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.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Rw

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 12

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

Dependency Pair:

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

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

Additionally, the following usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the implicit AFS can be oriented:

minus(x, 0) -> x
minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y)

Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:

POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁

POL(0) = 1

POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = x₁

POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

resulting in one new DP problem.

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

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

POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂))	= x₁
POL(0)	= 0
POL(s(x₁))	= 1 + x₁