Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[X, Y, Z]
and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

ADD(s(X), Y) -> ADD(X, Y)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> FIRST(X, Z)
FROM(X) -> FROM(s(X))

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(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 4

             ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(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 4

             ↳FwdInst

...

               →DP Problem 5

                 ↳Polynomial Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(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 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

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

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

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> FIRST(X, Z)

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> FIRST(X, Z)

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FIRST(s(s(X'')), cons(Y, cons(Y'', Z''))) -> FIRST(s(X''), cons(Y'', Z''))

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

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

FIRST(s(s(X'')), cons(Y, cons(Y'', Z''))) -> FIRST(s(X''), cons(Y'', Z''))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FIRST(s(s(X'')), cons(Y, cons(Y'', Z''))) -> FIRST(s(X''), cons(Y'', Z''))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FIRST(s(s(s(X''''))), cons(Y, cons(Y''0, cons(Y'''', Z'''')))) -> FIRST(s(s(X'''')), cons(Y''0, cons(Y'''', Z'''')))

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

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

FIRST(s(s(s(X''''))), cons(Y, cons(Y''0, cons(Y'''', Z'''')))) -> FIRST(s(s(X'''')), cons(Y''0, cons(Y'''', Z'''')))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

FIRST(s(s(s(X''''))), cons(Y, cons(Y''0, cons(Y'''', Z'''')))) -> FIRST(s(s(X'''')), cons(Y''0, cons(Y'''', Z'''')))

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(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 0

POL(FIRST(x₁, x₂)) = 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

         ↳Inst

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

FROM(X) -> FROM(s(X))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FROM(X) -> FROM(s(X))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FROM(s(X'')) -> FROM(s(s(X'')))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

FROM(s(X'')) -> FROM(s(s(X'')))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FROM(s(X'')) -> FROM(s(s(X'')))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FROM(s(s(X''''))) -> FROM(s(s(s(X''''))))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Inst

...

               →DP Problem 11

                 ↳Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

FROM(s(s(X''''))) -> FROM(s(s(s(X''''))))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FROM(s(s(X''''))) -> FROM(s(s(s(X''''))))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FROM(s(s(s(X'''''')))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(X'''''')))))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Inst

...

               →DP Problem 12

                 ↳Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

FROM(s(s(s(X'''''')))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(X'''''')))))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FROM(s(s(s(X'''''')))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(X'''''')))))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FROM(s(s(s(s(X''''''''))))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(s(X''''''''))))))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Inst

...

               →DP Problem 13

                 ↳Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

FROM(s(s(s(s(X''''''''))))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(s(X''''''''))))))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

FROM(s(s(s(s(X''''''''))))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(s(X''''''''))))))

one new Dependency Pair is created:

FROM(s(s(s(s(s(X'''''''''')))))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(s(s(X'''''''''')))))))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Inst

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Inst

...

               →DP Problem 14

                 ↳Remaining Obligation(s)

The following remains to be proven:
Dependency Pair:

FROM(s(s(s(s(s(X'''''''''')))))) -> FROM(s(s(s(s(s(s(X'''''''''')))))))

Rules:

and(true, X) -> X
and(false, Y) -> false
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

POL(cons(x₁, x₂))	= 0
POL(FIRST(x₁, x₂))	= x₁
POL(s(x₁))	= 1 + x₁