(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(g(X), Y) → f(X, n__f(g(X), activate(Y)))
f(X1, X2) → n__f(X1, X2)
activate(n__f(X1, X2)) → f(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X
Q is empty.
(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.
(2) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(g(X), Y) → F(X, n__f(g(X), activate(Y)))
F(g(X), Y) → ACTIVATE(Y)
ACTIVATE(n__f(X1, X2)) → F(X1, X2)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(g(X), Y) → f(X, n__f(g(X), activate(Y)))
f(X1, X2) → n__f(X1, X2)
activate(n__f(X1, X2)) → f(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(3) NonTerminationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We used the non-termination processor [FROCOS05] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by narrowing to the left:
s =
F(
g(
X'),
n__f(
g(
X),
X2)) evaluates to t =
F(
X,
n__f(
g(
X),
activate(
X2)))
Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Matcher: [X' / X'', X2 / activate(X2)]
- Semiunifier: [X / g(X'')]
Rewriting sequenceF(g(X'), n__f(g(g(X'')), X2)) →
ACTIVATE(
n__f(
g(
g(
X'')),
X2))
with rule
F(
g(
X'''),
Y) →
ACTIVATE(
Y) at position [] and matcher [
X''' /
X',
Y /
n__f(
g(
g(
X'')),
X2)]
ACTIVATE(n__f(g(g(X'')), X2)) →
F(
g(
g(
X'')),
X2)
with rule
ACTIVATE(
n__f(
X1,
X2')) →
F(
X1,
X2') at position [] and matcher [
X1 /
g(
g(
X'')),
X2' /
X2]
F(g(g(X'')), X2) →
F(
g(
X''),
n__f(
g(
g(
X'')),
activate(
X2)))
with rule
F(
g(
X),
Y) →
F(
X,
n__f(
g(
X),
activate(
Y)))
Now applying the matcher to the start term leads to a term which is equal to the last term in the rewriting sequence
All these steps are and every following step will be a correct step w.r.t to Q.
(4) NO