Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y]
p(s(x)) -> x
fact(0) -> s(0)
fact(s(x)) -> *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) -> 0
*(s(x), y) -> +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) -> x
+(x, s(y)) -> s(+(x, y))

Termination of R to be shown.

`   R`
`     ↳Overlay and local confluence Check`

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent (all critical pairs are trivially joinable).Hence, we can switch to innermost.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳Dependency Pair Analysis`

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

FACT(s(x)) -> *'(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(p(s(x)))
FACT(s(x)) -> P(s(x))
*'(s(x), y) -> +'(*(x, y), y)
*'(s(x), y) -> *'(x, y)
+'(x, s(y)) -> +'(x, y)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

p(s(x)) -> x
fact(0) -> s(0)
fact(s(x)) -> *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) -> 0
*(s(x), y) -> +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) -> x
+(x, s(y)) -> s(+(x, y))

Strategy:

innermost

As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 7 non-usable-rules.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`             ...`
`               →DP Problem 4`
`                 ↳Size-Change Principle`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`

Dependency Pair:

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

Rule:

none

Strategy:

innermost

We number the DPs as follows:
1. +'(x, s(y)) -> +'(x, y)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
{1} , {1}
1=1
2>2

which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
{1} , {1}
1=1
2>2

DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none

We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial

with Argument Filtering System:
s(x1) -> s(x1)

We obtain no new DP problems.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

p(s(x)) -> x
fact(0) -> s(0)
fact(s(x)) -> *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) -> 0
*(s(x), y) -> +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) -> x
+(x, s(y)) -> s(+(x, y))

Strategy:

innermost

As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 7 non-usable-rules.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`             ...`
`               →DP Problem 5`
`                 ↳Size-Change Principle`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`

Dependency Pair:

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

Rule:

none

Strategy:

innermost

We number the DPs as follows:
1. *'(s(x), y) -> *'(x, y)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1
2=2

which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1
2=2

DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none

We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial

with Argument Filtering System:
s(x1) -> s(x1)

We obtain no new DP problems.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)`

Dependency Pair:

FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(p(s(x)))

Rules:

p(s(x)) -> x
fact(0) -> s(0)
fact(s(x)) -> *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) -> 0
*(s(x), y) -> +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) -> x
+(x, s(y)) -> s(+(x, y))

Strategy:

innermost

As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 6 non-usable-rules.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`             ...`
`               →DP Problem 6`
`                 ↳Rewriting Transformation`

Dependency Pair:

FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(p(s(x)))

Rule:

p(s(x)) -> x

Strategy:

innermost

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

FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(p(s(x)))
one new Dependency Pair is created:

FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(x)

The transformation is resulting in one new DP problem:

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`             ...`
`               →DP Problem 7`
`                 ↳Usable Rules (Innermost)`

Dependency Pair:

FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(x)

Rule:

p(s(x)) -> x

Strategy:

innermost

As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 1 non-usable-rules.

`   R`
`     ↳OC`
`       →TRS2`
`         ↳DPs`
`           →DP Problem 1`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 2`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`           →DP Problem 3`
`             ↳UsableRules`
`             ...`
`               →DP Problem 8`
`                 ↳Size-Change Principle`

Dependency Pair:

FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(x)

Rule:

none

Strategy:

innermost

We number the DPs as follows:
1. FACT(s(x)) -> FACT(x)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1

which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
{1} , {1}
1>1

DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none

We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial

with Argument Filtering System:
s(x1) -> s(x1)

We obtain no new DP problems.

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