Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be proven:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
Q is empty.
The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [19] we can switch to innermost.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
-1(s(x), s(y)) → -1(x, y)
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → F(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
PERFECTP(s(x)) → F(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → IF(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → -1(z, s(x))
<=1(s(x), s(y)) → <=1(x, y)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(x, u, z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → <=1(x, y)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → -1(y, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
-1(s(x), s(y)) → -1(x, y)
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → F(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
PERFECTP(s(x)) → F(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → IF(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → -1(z, s(x))
<=1(s(x), s(y)) → <=1(x, y)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(x, u, z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → <=1(x, y)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → -1(y, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 3 SCCs with 5 less nodes.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
<=1(s(x), s(y)) → <=1(x, y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
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
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
<=1(s(x), s(y)) → <=1(x, y)
R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
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.
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
<=1(s(x), s(y)) → <=1(x, y)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:
- <=1(s(x), s(y)) → <=1(x, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
-1(s(x), s(y)) → -1(x, y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
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
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
-1(s(x), s(y)) → -1(x, y)
R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
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.
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
-1(s(x), s(y)) → -1(x, y)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:
- -1(s(x), s(y)) → -1(x, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → F(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(x, u, z, u)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
<=(0, y) → true
<=(s(x), 0) → false
<=(s(x), s(y)) → <=(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
perfectp(0) → false
perfectp(s(x)) → f(x, s(0), s(x), s(x))
f(0, y, 0, u) → true
f(0, y, s(z), u) → false
f(s(x), 0, z, u) → f(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
f(s(x), s(y), z, u) → if(<=(x, y), f(s(x), -(y, x), z, u), f(x, u, z, u))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
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
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → F(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(x, u, z, u)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
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.
<=(0, x0)
<=(s(x0), 0)
<=(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
perfectp(0)
perfectp(s(x0))
f(0, x0, 0, x1)
f(0, x0, s(x1), x2)
f(s(x0), 0, x1, x2)
f(s(x0), s(x1), x2, x3)
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → F(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(x, u, z, u)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
F(s(x), 0, z, u) → F(x, u, -(z, s(x)), u)
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(x, u, z, u)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(-(x1, x2)) = 0
POL(0) = 0
POL(F(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = x1
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:
none
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDPOrderProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(-(x1, x2)) = x1
POL(0) = 0
POL(F(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = x2
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
↳ QDPOrderProof
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
F(s(x), s(y), z, u) → F(s(x), -(y, x), z, u)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [3]:
Non-tuple symbols:
M( -(x1, x2) ) = | | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 |
Tuple symbols:
M( F(x1, ..., x4) ) = | 0 | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 | + | | · | x3 | + | | · | x4 |
Matrix type:
We used a basic matrix type which is not further parametrizeable.
As matrix orders are CE-compatible, we used usable rules w.r.t. argument filtering in the order.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.