Term Rewriting System R:
[x, y, v, w, z]
sort(nil) -> nil
sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y))
insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil)
insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w))
choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w))
choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
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:
SORT(cons(x, y)) -> INSERT(x, sort(y))
SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y)
INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w)
CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
Furthermore, R contains two SCCs.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pairs:
CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w)
INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
Rules:
sort(nil) -> nil
sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y))
insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil)
insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w))
choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w))
choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
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 3
↳Size-Change Principle
→DP Problem 2
↳UsableRules
Dependency Pairs:
CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w)
INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
- CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> INSERT(x, w)
- INSERT(x, cons(v, w)) -> CHOOSE(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
s(x1) -> s(x1)
We obtain no new DP problems.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
→DP Problem 2
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
Dependency Pair:
SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y)
Rules:
sort(nil) -> nil
sort(cons(x, y)) -> insert(x, sort(y))
insert(x, nil) -> cons(x, nil)
insert(x, cons(v, w)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), x, v)
choose(x, cons(v, w), y, 0) -> cons(x, cons(v, w))
choose(x, cons(v, w), 0, s(z)) -> cons(v, insert(x, w))
choose(x, cons(v, w), s(y), s(z)) -> choose(x, cons(v, w), y, z)
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 4
↳Size-Change Principle
Dependency Pair:
SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- SORT(cons(x, y)) -> SORT(y)
and get the following Size-Change Graph(s):
which lead(s) to this/these maximal multigraph(s):
DP: empty set
Oriented Rules: none
We used the order Homeomorphic Embedding Order with Non-Strict Precedence.
trivial
with Argument Filtering System:
cons(x1, x2) -> cons(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
Termination of R successfully shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes