Termination Proof using AProVE

Term Rewriting System R:
[N, X, Y, Z, X1, X2]
terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Termination of R to be shown.

     ↳Dependency Pair Analysis

R contains the following Dependency Pairs:

TERMS(N) -> SQR(N)
SQR(s(X)) -> ADD(sqr(X), dbl(X))
SQR(s(X)) -> SQR(X)
SQR(s(X)) -> DBL(X)
DBL(s(X)) -> DBL(X)
ADD(s(X), Y) -> ADD(X, Y)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> ACTIVATE(Z)
ACTIVATE(n_{_terms}(X)) -> TERMS(X)
ACTIVATE(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> FIRST(X1, X2)

Furthermore, R contains four SCCs.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

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

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

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

There are no usable rules using the Ce-refinement that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

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

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 5

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> 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

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

DBL(s(X)) -> DBL(X)

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

DBL(s(X)) -> DBL(X)

There are no usable rules using the Ce-refinement that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

DBL(x₁) -> DBL(x₁)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 6

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> 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

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

SQR(s(X)) -> SQR(X)

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

The following dependency pair can be strictly oriented:

SQR(s(X)) -> SQR(X)

There are no usable rules using the Ce-refinement that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

SQR(x₁) -> SQR(x₁)
s(x₁) -> s(x₁)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 7

             ↳Dependency Graph

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳Argument Filtering and Ordering

Dependency Pairs:

ACTIVATE(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> FIRST(X1, X2)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> ACTIVATE(Z)

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

The following dependency pairs can be strictly oriented:

ACTIVATE(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> FIRST(X1, X2)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> ACTIVATE(Z)

There are no usable rules using the Ce-refinement that need to be oriented.
Used ordering: Homeomorphic Embedding Order with EMB
resulting in one new DP problem.
Used Argument Filtering System:

ACTIVATE(x₁) -> x₁
n_{_first}(x₁, x₂) -> n_{_first}(x₁, x₂)
FIRST(x₁, x₂) -> x₂
cons(x₁, x₂) -> cons(x₁, x₂)

     ↳DPs

       →DP Problem 1

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 2

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 3

         ↳AFS

       →DP Problem 4

         ↳AFS

           →DP Problem 8

             ↳Dependency Graph

Dependency Pair:

Rules:

terms(N) -> cons(recip(sqr(N)), n_{_terms}(s(N)))
terms(X) -> n_{_terms}(X)
sqr(0) -> 0
sqr(s(X)) -> s(add(sqr(X), dbl(X)))
dbl(0) -> 0
dbl(s(X)) -> s(s(dbl(X)))
add(0, X) -> X
add(s(X), Y) -> s(add(X, Y))
first(0, X) -> nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) -> cons(Y, n_{_first}(X, activate(Z)))
first(X1, X2) -> n_{_first}(X1, X2)
activate(n_{_terms}(X)) -> terms(X)
activate(n_{_first}(X1, X2)) -> first(X1, X2)
activate(X) -> X

Using the Dependency Graph resulted in no new DP problems.

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