(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
fold(X, [], Z) :- ','(!, eq(X, Z)).
fold(X, Y, Z) :- ','(head(Y, H), ','(tail(Y, T), ','(myop(X, H, V), fold(V, T, Z)))).
myop(a, b, a).
head([], X1).
head(.(H, X2), H).
tail([], []).
tail(.(X3, T), T).
eq(X, X).
Query: fold(g,g,a)
(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)
Built DT problem from termination graph DT10.
(2) Obligation:
Triples:
foldA(.(b, X1), X2) :- foldA(X1, X2).
foldB(a, .(b, X1), X2) :- foldA(X1, X2).
Clauses:
foldcA([], a).
foldcA(.(b, X1), X2) :- foldcA(X1, X2).
Afs:
foldB(x1, x2, x3) = foldB(x1, x2)
(3) TriplesToPiDPProof (SOUND transformation)
We use the technique of [DT09]. With regard to the inferred argument filtering the predicates were used in the following modes:
foldB_in: (b,b,f)
foldA_in: (b,f)
Transforming
TRIPLES into the following
Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
FOLDB_IN_GGA(a, .(b, X1), X2) → U2_GGA(X1, X2, foldA_in_ga(X1, X2))
FOLDB_IN_GGA(a, .(b, X1), X2) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1, X2)
FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1), X2) → U1_GA(X1, X2, foldA_in_ga(X1, X2))
FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1), X2) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1, X2)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
a =
a
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
b =
b
foldA_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
foldA_in_ga(
x1)
FOLDB_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
FOLDB_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U2_GGA(
x1,
x3)
FOLDA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
FOLDA_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x3)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
Infinitary Constructor Rewriting Termination of PiDP implies Termination of TRIPLES
(4) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
FOLDB_IN_GGA(a, .(b, X1), X2) → U2_GGA(X1, X2, foldA_in_ga(X1, X2))
FOLDB_IN_GGA(a, .(b, X1), X2) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1, X2)
FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1), X2) → U1_GA(X1, X2, foldA_in_ga(X1, X2))
FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1), X2) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1, X2)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
a =
a
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
b =
b
foldA_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
foldA_in_ga(
x1)
FOLDB_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
FOLDB_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U2_GGA(
x1,
x3)
FOLDA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
FOLDA_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x3)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 1 SCC with 3 less nodes.
(6) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1), X2) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1, X2)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
b =
b
FOLDA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
FOLDA_IN_GA(
x1)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(7) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(8) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1)) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(9) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.
From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- FOLDA_IN_GA(.(b, X1)) → FOLDA_IN_GA(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
(10) YES