Term Rewriting System R:
[YS, X, XS, Y, L]
app(nil, YS) -> YS
app(cons(X, XS), YS) -> cons(X, app(XS, YS))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))
zWadr(nil, YS) -> nil
zWadr(XS, nil) -> nil
zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) -> cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS))
prefix(L) -> cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L)))

Innermost Termination of R to be shown.



   R
Dependency Pair Analysis



R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

APP(cons(X, XS), YS) -> APP(XS, YS)
FROM(X) -> FROM(s(X))
ZWADR(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) -> APP(Y, cons(X, nil))
ZWADR(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) -> ZWADR(XS, YS)
PREFIX(L) -> ZWADR(L, prefix(L))
PREFIX(L) -> PREFIX(L)

Furthermore, R contains four SCCs.


   R
DPs
       →DP Problem 1
Argument Filtering and Ordering
       →DP Problem 2
Inst
       →DP Problem 3
Remaining
       →DP Problem 4
Remaining


Dependency Pair:

APP(cons(X, XS), YS) -> APP(XS, YS)


Rules:


app(nil, YS) -> YS
app(cons(X, XS), YS) -> cons(X, app(XS, YS))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))
zWadr(nil, YS) -> nil
zWadr(XS, nil) -> nil
zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) -> cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS))
prefix(L) -> cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L)))


Strategy:

innermost




The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

APP(cons(X, XS), YS) -> APP(XS, YS)


There are no usable rules for innermost w.r.t. to the AFS that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Polynomial ordering with Polynomial interpretation:
  POL(cons(x1, x2))=  1 + x1 + x2  
  POL(APP(x1, x2))=  x1 + x2  

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:
APP(x1, x2) -> APP(x1, x2)
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)


   R
DPs
       →DP Problem 1
AFS
           →DP Problem 5
Dependency Graph
       →DP Problem 2
Inst
       →DP Problem 3
Remaining
       →DP Problem 4
Remaining


Dependency Pair:


Rules:


app(nil, YS) -> YS
app(cons(X, XS), YS) -> cons(X, app(XS, YS))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))
zWadr(nil, YS) -> nil
zWadr(XS, nil) -> nil
zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) -> cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS))
prefix(L) -> cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L)))


Strategy:

innermost




Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.


   R
DPs
       →DP Problem 1
AFS
       →DP Problem 2
Instantiation Transformation
       →DP Problem 3
Remaining
       →DP Problem 4
Remaining


Dependency Pair:

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


Rules:


app(nil, YS) -> YS
app(cons(X, XS), YS) -> cons(X, app(XS, YS))
from(X) -> cons(X, from(s(X)))
zWadr(nil, YS) -> nil
zWadr(XS, nil) -> nil
zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) -> cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS))
prefix(L) -> cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L)))


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:



   R
DPs
       →DP Problem 1
AFS
       →DP Problem 2
Inst
       →DP Problem 3
Remaining Obligation(s)
       →DP Problem 4
Remaining Obligation(s)




The following remains to be proven:


   R
DPs
       →DP Problem 1
AFS
       →DP Problem 2
Inst
       →DP Problem 3
Remaining Obligation(s)
       →DP Problem 4
Remaining Obligation(s)




The following remains to be proven:


   R
DPs
       →DP Problem 1
AFS
       →DP Problem 2
Inst
       →DP Problem 3
Remaining Obligation(s)
       →DP Problem 4
Remaining Obligation(s)




The following remains to be proven:

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