Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be disproven:

0 QTRS
↳1 Overlay + Local Confluence (⇔)
↳2 QTRS
↳3 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳4 QDP
↳5 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳6 AND
    ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 UsableRulesProof (⇔)
        ↳9 QDP
        ↳10 QReductionProof (⇔)
        ↳11 QDP
        ↳12 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)
        ↳13 YES
    ↳14 QDP
        ↳15 UsableRulesProof (⇔)
        ↳16 QDP
        ↳17 QReductionProof (⇔)
        ↳18 QDP
        ↳19 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)
        ↳20 YES
    ↳21 QDP
        ↳22 UsableRulesProof (⇔)
        ↳23 QDP
        ↳24 QReductionProof (⇔)
        ↳25 QDP
        ↳26 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)
        ↳27 YES
    ↳28 QDP
        ↳29 UsableRulesProof (⇔)
        ↳30 QDP
        ↳31 QReductionProof (⇔)
        ↳32 QDP
        ↳33 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)
        ↳34 YES
    ↳35 QDP
        ↳36 UsableRulesProof (⇔)
        ↳37 QDP
        ↳38 QReductionProof (⇔)
        ↳39 QDP
        ↳40 Instantiation (⇔)
        ↳41 QDP
        ↳42 Instantiation (⇔)
        ↳43 QDP
        ↳44 NonTerminationProof (⇔)
        ↳45 NO

(0) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

Q is empty.

(1) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost.

(2) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(4) Obligation:

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

TERMS(N) → SQR(N)
TERMS(N) → TERMS(s(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)) → FIRST(X, Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 5 SCCs with 3 less nodes.

(6) Complex Obligation (AND)

(7) Obligation:

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

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(9) Obligation:

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

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(10) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

(11) Obligation:

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

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)

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

(12) 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:

  • FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(13) YES

(14) Obligation:

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

ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(15) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(16) Obligation:

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

ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(17) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

(18) Obligation:

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

ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)

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

(19) 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:

  • ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

(20) YES

(21) Obligation:

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

DBL(s(X)) → DBL(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(22) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(23) Obligation:

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

DBL(s(X)) → DBL(X)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(24) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

(25) Obligation:

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

DBL(s(X)) → DBL(X)

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

(26) 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:

  • DBL(s(X)) → DBL(X)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(27) YES

(28) Obligation:

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

SQR(s(X)) → SQR(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(29) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(30) Obligation:

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

SQR(s(X)) → SQR(X)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(31) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

(32) Obligation:

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

SQR(s(X)) → SQR(X)

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

(33) 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:

  • SQR(s(X)) → SQR(X)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(34) YES

(35) Obligation:

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

TERMS(N) → TERMS(s(N))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

terms(N) → cons(recip(sqr(N)), terms(s(N)))
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, first(X, Z))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(36) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(37) Obligation:

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

TERMS(N) → TERMS(s(N))

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

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

(38) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

terms(x0)
sqr(0)
sqr(s(x0))
dbl(0)
dbl(s(x0))
add(0, x0)
add(s(x0), x1)
first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))

(39) Obligation:

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

TERMS(N) → TERMS(s(N))

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

(40) Instantiation (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By instantiating [LPAR04] the rule TERMS(N) → TERMS(s(N)) we obtained the following new rules [LPAR04]:

TERMS(s(z0)) → TERMS(s(s(z0)))

(41) Obligation:

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

TERMS(s(z0)) → TERMS(s(s(z0)))

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

(42) Instantiation (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By instantiating [LPAR04] the rule TERMS(s(z0)) → TERMS(s(s(z0))) we obtained the following new rules [LPAR04]:

TERMS(s(s(z0))) → TERMS(s(s(s(z0))))

(43) Obligation:

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

TERMS(s(s(z0))) → TERMS(s(s(s(z0))))

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

(44) NonTerminationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We used the non-termination processor [FROCOS05] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly.

s = TERMS(s(s(z0))) evaluates to t =TERMS(s(s(s(z0))))

Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
  • Matcher: [z0 / s(z0)]
  • Semiunifier: [ ]



Rewriting sequence

The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from TERMS(s(s(z0))) to TERMS(s(s(s(z0)))).



(45) NO