(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
len([], 0).
len(Xs, s(N)) :- ','(no(empty(Xs)), ','(tail(Xs, Ys), len(Ys, N))).
tail([], []).
tail(.(X, Xs), Xs).
empty([]).
no(X) :- ','(X, ','(!, failure(a))).
no(X1).
failure(b).
Query: len(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:
lenA_in_ga([], 0) → lenA_out_ga([], 0)
lenA_in_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_in_ga(T22, T10))
U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_out_ga(T22, T10)) → lenA_out_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
lenA_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
(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:
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → U1_GA(T21, T22, T10, lenA_in_ga(T22, T10))
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → LENA_IN_GA(T22, T10)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
lenA_in_ga([], 0) → lenA_out_ga([], 0)
lenA_in_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_in_ga(T22, T10))
U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_out_ga(T22, T10)) → lenA_out_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
lenA_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
LENA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
LENA_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(4) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → U1_GA(T21, T22, T10, lenA_in_ga(T22, T10))
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → LENA_IN_GA(T22, T10)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
lenA_in_ga([], 0) → lenA_out_ga([], 0)
lenA_in_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_in_ga(T22, T10))
U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_out_ga(T22, T10)) → lenA_out_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
lenA_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
LENA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
LENA_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
(6) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → LENA_IN_GA(T22, T10)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
lenA_in_ga([], 0) → lenA_out_ga([], 0)
lenA_in_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_in_ga(T22, T10))
U1_ga(T21, T22, T10, lenA_out_ga(T22, T10)) → lenA_out_ga(.(T21, T22), s(T10))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
lenA_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
lenA_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
LENA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
LENA_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:
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22), s(T10)) → LENA_IN_GA(T22, T10)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
LENA_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
LENA_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:
LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22)) → LENA_IN_GA(T22)
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:
- LENA_IN_GA(.(T21, T22)) → LENA_IN_GA(T22)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
(12) YES