(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
c → f(n__g(n__c))
f(n__g(X)) → g(activate(X))
g(X) → n__g(X)
c → n__c
activate(n__g(X)) → g(X)
activate(n__c) → c
activate(X) → X
Q is empty.
(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(activate(x1)) = 1 + x1
POL(c) = 1
POL(f(x1)) = 1 + x1
POL(g(x1)) = x1
POL(n__c) = 0
POL(n__g(x1)) = x1
With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:
c → n__c
activate(n__g(X)) → g(X)
activate(X) → X
(2) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
c → f(n__g(n__c))
f(n__g(X)) → g(activate(X))
g(X) → n__g(X)
activate(n__c) → c
Q is empty.
(3) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost.
(4) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
c → f(n__g(n__c))
f(n__g(X)) → g(activate(X))
g(X) → n__g(X)
activate(n__c) → c
The set Q consists of the following terms:
c
f(n__g(x0))
g(x0)
activate(n__c)
(5) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.
(6) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
C → F(n__g(n__c))
F(n__g(X)) → G(activate(X))
F(n__g(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__c) → C
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
c → f(n__g(n__c))
f(n__g(X)) → g(activate(X))
g(X) → n__g(X)
activate(n__c) → c
The set Q consists of the following terms:
c
f(n__g(x0))
g(x0)
activate(n__c)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
(8) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(n__g(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__c) → C
C → F(n__g(n__c))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
c → f(n__g(n__c))
f(n__g(X)) → g(activate(X))
g(X) → n__g(X)
activate(n__c) → c
The set Q consists of the following terms:
c
f(n__g(x0))
g(x0)
activate(n__c)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(9) 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.
(10) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(n__g(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__c) → C
C → F(n__g(n__c))
R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:
c
f(n__g(x0))
g(x0)
activate(n__c)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(11) 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].
c
f(n__g(x0))
g(x0)
activate(n__c)
(12) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(n__g(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__c) → C
C → F(n__g(n__c))
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(13) 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 =
ACTIVATE(
n__c) evaluates to t =
ACTIVATE(
n__c)
Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Matcher: [ ]
- Semiunifier: [ ]
Rewriting sequenceACTIVATE(n__c) →
Cwith rule
ACTIVATE(
n__c) →
C at position [] and matcher [ ]
C →
F(
n__g(
n__c))
with rule
C →
F(
n__g(
n__c)) at position [] and matcher [ ]
F(n__g(n__c)) →
ACTIVATE(
n__c)
with rule
F(
n__g(
X)) →
ACTIVATE(
X)
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.
(14) NO