Term Rewriting System R:
[f, x, xs]
app(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> app(leaf, app(f, x))
app(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> app(node, app(app(maptlist, f), xs))
app(app(maptlist, f), nil) -> nil
app(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, app(app(mapt, f), x)), app(app(maptlist, f), xs))
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:
APP(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> APP(leaf, app(f, x))
APP(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> APP(f, x)
APP(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> APP(node, app(app(maptlist, f), xs))
APP(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
APP(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> APP(maptlist, f)
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(cons, app(app(mapt, f), x)), app(app(maptlist, f), xs))
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(cons, app(app(mapt, f), x))
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(mapt, f), x)
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(mapt, f)
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
Furthermore, R contains one SCC.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳Usable Rules (Innermost)
Dependency Pairs:
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(mapt, f), x)
APP(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
APP(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> APP(f, x)
Rules:
app(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> app(leaf, app(f, x))
app(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> app(node, app(app(maptlist, f), xs))
app(app(maptlist, f), nil) -> nil
app(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> app(app(cons, app(app(mapt, f), x)), app(app(maptlist, f), xs))
Strategy:
innermost
As we are in the innermost case, we can delete all 4 non-usable-rules.
R
↳OC
→TRS2
↳DPs
→DP Problem 1
↳UsableRules
...
→DP Problem 2
↳Size-Change Principle
Dependency Pairs:
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(mapt, f), x)
APP(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
APP(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> APP(f, x)
Rule:
none
Strategy:
innermost
We number the DPs as follows:
- APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
- APP(app(maptlist, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) -> APP(app(mapt, f), x)
- APP(app(mapt, f), app(node, xs)) -> APP(app(maptlist, f), xs)
- APP(app(mapt, f), app(leaf, x)) -> APP(f, x)
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:
app(x1, x2) -> app(x1, x2)
We obtain no new DP problems.
Termination of R successfully shown.
Duration:
0:00 minutes