Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[X, Y, N, M]
eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

EQ(s(X), s(Y)) -> EQ(X, Y)
RM(N, add(M, X)) -> IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
RM(N, add(M, X)) -> EQ(N, M)
IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) -> RM(N, X)
IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) -> RM(N, X)
PURGE(add(N, X)) -> PURGE(rm(N, X))
PURGE(add(N, X)) -> RM(N, X)

Furthermore, R contains three SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

There are no usable rules w.r.t. to the AFS that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

trivial

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

EQ(x₁, x₂) -> EQ(x₁, x₂)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 4

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pairs:

IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) -> RM(N, X)
IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) -> RM(N, X)
RM(N, add(M, X)) -> IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

Rules:

eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The following dependency pairs can be strictly oriented:

IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) -> RM(N, X)
IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) -> RM(N, X)

There are no usable rules w.r.t. to the AFS that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

trivial

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

IFRM(x₁, x₂, x₃) -> x₃
add(x₁, x₂) -> add(x₁, x₂)
RM(x₁, x₂) -> x₂

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 5

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

RM(N, add(M, X)) -> IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

Rules:

eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

Dependency Pair:

PURGE(add(N, X)) -> PURGE(rm(N, X))

Rules:

eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

PURGE(add(N, X)) -> PURGE(rm(N, X))

The following usable rules w.r.t. to the AFS can be oriented:

ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

Used ordering: Lexicographic Path Order with Non-Strict Precedence with Quasi Precedence:

trivial

resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

PURGE(x₁) -> PURGE(x₁)
add(x₁, x₂) -> add(x₁, x₂)
rm(x₁, x₂) -> x₂
ifrm(x₁, x₂, x₃) -> x₃

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Dependency Graph

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

eq(0, 0) -> true
eq(0, s(X)) -> false
eq(s(X), 0) -> false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) -> eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) -> nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) -> ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) -> rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) -> add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) -> nil
purge(add(N, X)) -> add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

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