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:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
Q is empty.
Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A(h, x) → A(f, x)
A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x)
A(h, x) → A(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
A(h, x) → A(g, a(f, x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A(h, x) → A(f, x)
A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x)
A(h, x) → A(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
A(h, x) → A(g, a(f, x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A(h, x) → A(f, x)
A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
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:
- A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x)
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 1, 2 > 2
- A(h, x) → A(f, x)
The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2