Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[Y, X]
minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> 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)
GEQ(s(X), s(Y)) -> GEQ(X, Y)
DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> IF(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> GEQ(X, Y)
DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y))
DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> MINUS(X, Y)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> 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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> 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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> 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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> 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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y

Strategy:

innermost

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

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

one new Dependency Pair is created:

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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y

Strategy:

innermost

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

         ↳Nar

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> 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

         ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y

Strategy:

innermost

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

DIV(s(X), s(Y)) -> DIV(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

DIV(s(0), s(Y'')) -> DIV(0, s(Y''))
DIV(s(s(X'')), s(s(Y''))) -> DIV(minus(X'', Y''), s(s(Y'')))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Narrowing Transformation

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(s(X'')), s(s(Y''))) -> DIV(minus(X'', Y''), s(s(Y'')))

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y

Strategy:

innermost

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

DIV(s(s(X'')), s(s(Y''))) -> DIV(minus(X'', Y''), s(s(Y'')))

two new Dependency Pairs are created:

DIV(s(s(0)), s(s(Y'''))) -> DIV(0, s(s(Y''')))
DIV(s(s(s(X'))), s(s(s(Y')))) -> DIV(minus(X', Y'), s(s(s(Y'))))

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳FwdInst

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Nar

           →DP Problem 10

             ↳Nar

...

               →DP Problem 11

                 ↳Forward Instantiation Transformation

Dependency Pair:

DIV(s(s(s(X'))), s(s(s(Y')))) -> DIV(minus(X', Y'), s(s(s(Y'))))

Rules:

minus(0, Y) -> 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) -> minus(X, Y)
geq(X, 0) -> true
geq(0, s(Y)) -> false
geq(s(X), s(Y)) -> geq(X, Y)
div(0, s(Y)) -> 0
div(s(X), s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, Y), s(div(minus(X, Y), s(Y))), 0)
if(true, X, Y) -> X
if(false, X, Y) -> Y

Strategy:

innermost

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

DIV(s(s(s(X'))), s(s(s(Y')))) -> DIV(minus(X', Y'), s(s(s(Y'))))

no new Dependency Pairs are created.
The transformation is resulting in no new DP problems.

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

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

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