The TRS could be proven non-terminating. The proof took 537 ms.

The following reduction sequence is a witness for non-termination:

rev#(cons(___x, nil)) →* rev#(cons(___x, nil))

The following DP Processors were used


Problem 1 was processed with processor DependencyGraph (0ms).
 | – Problem 2 was processed with processor SubtermCriterion (0ms).
 | – Problem 3 was processed with processor PolynomialOrdering (0ms).
 | – Problem 4 was processed with processor BackwardInstantiation (5ms).
 |    | – Problem 5 was processed with processor BackwardInstantiation (3ms).
 |    |    | – Problem 6 was processed with processor BackwardInstantiation (2ms).
 |    |    |    | – Problem 7 remains open; application of the following processors failed [ForwardInstantiation (2ms), Propagation (1ms)].

Problem 1: DependencyGraph



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

rev#(cons(x, xs))rev#(cons(x, nil))app#(cons(x, xs), ys)app#(xs, ys)
shuffle#(cons(x, xs))shuffle#(rev(xs))shuffle#(cons(x, xs))rev#(xs)

Rewrite Rules

app(nil, xs)nilapp(cons(x, xs), ys)cons(x, app(xs, ys))
rev(nil)nilrev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))
shuffle(nil)nilshuffle(cons(x, xs))cons(x, shuffle(rev(xs)))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: app, append, rev, shuffle, nil, cons

Strategy


Parameters


The following SCCs where found

rev#(cons(x, xs)) → rev#(cons(x, nil))

app#(cons(x, xs), ys) → app#(xs, ys)

shuffle#(cons(x, xs)) → shuffle#(rev(xs))

Problem 2: SubtermCriterion



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

app#(cons(x, xs), ys)app#(xs, ys)

Rewrite Rules

app(nil, xs)nilapp(cons(x, xs), ys)cons(x, app(xs, ys))
rev(nil)nilrev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))
shuffle(nil)nilshuffle(cons(x, xs))cons(x, shuffle(rev(xs)))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: app, append, rev, shuffle, nil, cons

Strategy


Projection

The following projection was used:

Thus, the following dependency pairs are removed:

app#(cons(x, xs), ys)app#(xs, ys)

Problem 3: PolynomialOrdering



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

shuffle#(cons(x, xs))shuffle#(rev(xs))

Rewrite Rules

app(nil, xs)nilapp(cons(x, xs), ys)cons(x, app(xs, ys))
rev(nil)nilrev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))
shuffle(nil)nilshuffle(cons(x, xs))cons(x, shuffle(rev(xs)))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: app, append, rev, shuffle, nil, cons

Strategy


Parameters


Polynomial Interpretation

Improved Usable rules

rev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))rev(nil)nil

The following dependency pairs are strictly oriented by an ordering on the given polynomial interpretation, thus they are removed:

shuffle#(cons(x, xs))shuffle#(rev(xs))

Problem 4: BackwardInstantiation



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

rev#(cons(x, xs))rev#(cons(x, nil))

Rewrite Rules

app(nil, xs)nilapp(cons(x, xs), ys)cons(x, app(xs, ys))
rev(nil)nilrev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))
shuffle(nil)nilshuffle(cons(x, xs))cons(x, shuffle(rev(xs)))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: app, append, rev, shuffle, nil, cons

Strategy


Instantiation

For all potential predecessors l → r of the rule rev#(cons(x, xs)) → rev#(cons(x, nil)) on dependency pair chains it holds that: Thus, rev#(cons(x, xs)) → rev#(cons(x, nil)) is replaced by instances determined through the above matching. These instances are:
rev#(cons(_x, nil)) → rev#(cons(_x, nil))

Problem 5: BackwardInstantiation



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

rev#(cons(_x, nil))rev#(cons(_x, nil))

Rewrite Rules

app(nil, xs)nilapp(cons(x, xs), ys)cons(x, app(xs, ys))
rev(nil)nilrev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))
shuffle(nil)nilshuffle(cons(x, xs))cons(x, shuffle(rev(xs)))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: append, app, rev, shuffle, cons, nil

Strategy


Instantiation

For all potential predecessors l → r of the rule rev#(cons(_x, nil)) → rev#(cons(_x, nil)) on dependency pair chains it holds that: Thus, rev#(cons(_x, nil)) → rev#(cons(_x, nil)) is replaced by instances determined through the above matching. These instances are:
rev#(cons(__x, nil)) → rev#(cons(__x, nil))

Problem 6: BackwardInstantiation



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

rev#(cons(__x, nil))rev#(cons(__x, nil))

Rewrite Rules

app(nil, xs)nilapp(cons(x, xs), ys)cons(x, app(xs, ys))
rev(nil)nilrev(cons(x, xs))append(xs, rev(cons(x, nil)))
shuffle(nil)nilshuffle(cons(x, xs))cons(x, shuffle(rev(xs)))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: app, append, rev, shuffle, nil, cons

Strategy


Instantiation

For all potential predecessors l → r of the rule rev#(cons(__x, nil)) → rev#(cons(__x, nil)) on dependency pair chains it holds that: Thus, rev#(cons(__x, nil)) → rev#(cons(__x, nil)) is replaced by instances determined through the above matching. These instances are:
rev#(cons(___x, nil)) → rev#(cons(___x, nil))