Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be disproven:

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

f(a) → f(a)
a → b

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof

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

f(a) → f(a)
a → b

Q is empty.

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

f(a) → f(a)
a → b

Q is empty.
The following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [15] because they are oriented strictly by a polynomial ordering:

a → b
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(a) = 2   
POL(b) = 1   
POL(f(x1)) = x1   




↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost

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

f(a) → f(a)

Q is empty.

We have applied [19,8] to switch to innermost. The TRS R 1 is none

The TRS R 2 is

f(a) → f(a)

The signature Sigma is {f}

↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost
        ↳ QTRS
          ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

f(a) → f(a)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a)


Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

F(a) → F(a)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(a) → f(a)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost
        ↳ QTRS
          ↳ DependencyPairsProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

F(a) → F(a)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(a) → f(a)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [15] we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost
        ↳ QTRS
          ↳ DependencyPairsProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
                ↳ QDP
                  ↳ QReductionProof
              ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

F(a) → F(a)

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

f(a)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

f(a)



↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost
        ↳ QTRS
          ↳ DependencyPairsProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
                ↳ QDP
                  ↳ QReductionProof
                    ↳ QDP
              ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

F(a) → F(a)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [15] we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost
        ↳ QTRS
          ↳ DependencyPairsProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
                ↳ QDP
                  ↳ QReductionProof

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

F(a) → F(a)

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

f(a)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

f(a)



↳ QTRS
  ↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ AAECC Innermost
        ↳ QTRS
          ↳ DependencyPairsProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ UsableRulesProof
                ↳ QDP
                  ↳ QReductionProof
                    ↳ QDP
                      ↳ NonTerminationProof

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

F(a) → F(a)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We used the non-termination processor [17] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly.

The TRS P consists of the following rules:

F(a) → F(a)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:none


s = F(a) evaluates to t =F(a)

Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:



Rewriting sequence

The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from F(a) to F(a).