(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) PrologToPiTRSViaGraphTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)

Transformed Prolog program to (Pi-)TRS.

(2) Obligation:

Pi-finite rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

foldA_in_gga(T11, [], T11) → foldA_out_gga(T11, [], T11)
foldA_in_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18) → U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_in_ga(T32, T18))
foldB_in_ga([], a) → foldB_out_ga([], a)
foldB_in_ga(.(b, T62), T47) → U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_in_ga(T62, T47))
U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_out_ga(T62, T47)) → foldB_out_ga(.(b, T62), T47)
U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_out_ga(T32, T18)) → foldA_out_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18)

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
foldA_in_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_in_gga(x1, x2)
[]  =  []
foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)
a  =  a
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x1, x2)
b  =  b
U1_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_gga(x1, x3)
foldB_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_in_ga(x1)
foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)
U2_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_ga(x1, x3)

(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LOPSTR] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FOLDA_IN_GGA(a, .(b, T32), T18) → U1_GGA(T32, T18, foldB_in_ga(T32, T18))
FOLDA_IN_GGA(a, .(b, T32), T18) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T32, T18)
FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62), T47) → U2_GA(T62, T47, foldB_in_ga(T62, T47))
FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62), T47) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T62, T47)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

foldA_in_gga(T11, [], T11) → foldA_out_gga(T11, [], T11)
foldA_in_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18) → U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_in_ga(T32, T18))
foldB_in_ga([], a) → foldB_out_ga([], a)
foldB_in_ga(.(b, T62), T47) → U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_in_ga(T62, T47))
U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_out_ga(T62, T47)) → foldB_out_ga(.(b, T62), T47)
U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_out_ga(T32, T18)) → foldA_out_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18)

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
foldA_in_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_in_gga(x1, x2)
[]  =  []
foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)
a  =  a
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x1, x2)
b  =  b
U1_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_gga(x1, x3)
foldB_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_in_ga(x1)
foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)
U2_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_ga(x1, x3)
FOLDA_IN_GGA(x1, x2, x3)  =  FOLDA_IN_GGA(x1, x2)
U1_GGA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_GGA(x1, x3)
FOLDB_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FOLDB_IN_GA(x1)
U2_GA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_GA(x1, x3)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(4) Obligation:

Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FOLDA_IN_GGA(a, .(b, T32), T18) → U1_GGA(T32, T18, foldB_in_ga(T32, T18))
FOLDA_IN_GGA(a, .(b, T32), T18) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T32, T18)
FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62), T47) → U2_GA(T62, T47, foldB_in_ga(T62, T47))
FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62), T47) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T62, T47)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

foldA_in_gga(T11, [], T11) → foldA_out_gga(T11, [], T11)
foldA_in_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18) → U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_in_ga(T32, T18))
foldB_in_ga([], a) → foldB_out_ga([], a)
foldB_in_ga(.(b, T62), T47) → U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_in_ga(T62, T47))
U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_out_ga(T62, T47)) → foldB_out_ga(.(b, T62), T47)
U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_out_ga(T32, T18)) → foldA_out_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18)

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
foldA_in_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_in_gga(x1, x2)
[]  =  []
foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)
a  =  a
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x1, x2)
b  =  b
U1_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_gga(x1, x3)
foldB_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_in_ga(x1)
foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)
U2_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_ga(x1, x3)
FOLDA_IN_GGA(x1, x2, x3)  =  FOLDA_IN_GGA(x1, x2)
U1_GGA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_GGA(x1, x3)
FOLDB_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FOLDB_IN_GA(x1)
U2_GA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_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:

FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62), T47) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T62, T47)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

foldA_in_gga(T11, [], T11) → foldA_out_gga(T11, [], T11)
foldA_in_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18) → U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_in_ga(T32, T18))
foldB_in_ga([], a) → foldB_out_ga([], a)
foldB_in_ga(.(b, T62), T47) → U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_in_ga(T62, T47))
U2_ga(T62, T47, foldB_out_ga(T62, T47)) → foldB_out_ga(.(b, T62), T47)
U1_gga(T32, T18, foldB_out_ga(T32, T18)) → foldA_out_gga(a, .(b, T32), T18)

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
foldA_in_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_in_gga(x1, x2)
[]  =  []
foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  foldA_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)
a  =  a
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x1, x2)
b  =  b
U1_gga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_gga(x1, x3)
foldB_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_in_ga(x1)
foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)  =  foldB_out_ga(x1, x2)
U2_ga(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_ga(x1, x3)
FOLDB_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FOLDB_IN_GA(x1)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(7) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(8) Obligation:

Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62), T47) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T62, T47)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x1, x2)
b  =  b
FOLDB_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FOLDB_IN_GA(x1)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(9) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(10) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62)) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T62)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.

(11) 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:

  • FOLDB_IN_GA(.(b, T62)) → FOLDB_IN_GA(T62)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(12) YES