(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → h(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
h(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → h(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
h(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → h(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
t(t(x)) → t(c(t(x), x))
t(x) → x
t(x) → c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, 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:
H(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → H(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
H(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → T(t(c(x, c(y, t(w)))))
H(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → T(c(x, c(y, t(w))))
H(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → H(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
H(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → T(c(t(w), w))
H(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → H(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
H(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → T(t(c(x, s(x))))
H(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → T(c(x, s(x)))
T(t(x)) → T(c(t(x), x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → h(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
h(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → h(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
h(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → h(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
t(t(x)) → t(c(t(x), x))
t(x) → x
t(x) → c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, x)))))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 6 less nodes.
(4) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
H(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → H(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
H(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → H(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
H(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → H(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → h(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
h(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → h(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
h(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → h(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
t(t(x)) → t(c(t(x), x))
t(x) → x
t(x) → c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, x)))))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
H(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → H(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(0) = 0
POL(H(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + x2
POL(c(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 + x2
POL(s(x1)) = x1
POL(t(x1)) = 0
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(6) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
H(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → H(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
H(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → H(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → h(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
h(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → h(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
h(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → h(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
t(t(x)) → t(c(t(x), x))
t(x) → x
t(x) → c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, x)))))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(7) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
H(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → H(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO]:
POL(H(x1, x2, x3)) = | | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 | + | | · | x3 |
POL(c(x1, x2)) = | | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 |
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(8) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
H(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → H(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(c(x, y), c(s(z), z), t(w)) → h(z, c(y, x), t(t(c(x, c(y, t(w))))))
h(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → h(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
h(c(s(x), c(s(0), y)), z, t(x)) → h(y, c(s(0), c(x, z)), t(t(c(x, s(x)))))
t(t(x)) → t(c(t(x), x))
t(x) → x
t(x) → c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, c(0, x)))))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(9) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] 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:
- H(x, c(y, z), t(w)) → H(c(s(y), x), z, t(c(t(w), w)))
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2
(10) TRUE