(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
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:
A__FILTER(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → MARK(X)
A__SIEVE(cons(s(N), Y)) → MARK(N)
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
A__ZPRIMES → A__SIEVE(a__nats(s(s(0))))
A__ZPRIMES → A__NATS(s(s(0)))
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → A__FILTER(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X2)
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X3)
MARK(sieve(X)) → A__SIEVE(mark(X))
MARK(sieve(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(zprimes) → A__ZPRIMES
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(3) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → A__FILTER(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X2)
MARK(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X3)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(0) = 0
POL(A__FILTER(x1, x2, x3)) = x1
POL(A__NATS(x1)) = x1
POL(A__SIEVE(x1)) = x1
POL(A__ZPRIMES) = 0
POL(MARK(x1)) = x1
POL(a__filter(x1, x2, x3)) = 1 + x1 + x2 + x3
POL(a__nats(x1)) = x1
POL(a__sieve(x1)) = x1
POL(a__zprimes) = 0
POL(cons(x1, x2)) = x1
POL(filter(x1, x2, x3)) = 1 + x1 + x2 + x3
POL(mark(x1)) = x1
POL(nats(x1)) = x1
POL(s(x1)) = x1
POL(sieve(x1)) = x1
POL(zprimes) = 0
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__zprimes → zprimes
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
(4) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A__FILTER(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → MARK(X)
A__SIEVE(cons(s(N), Y)) → MARK(N)
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
A__ZPRIMES → A__SIEVE(a__nats(s(s(0))))
A__ZPRIMES → A__NATS(s(s(0)))
MARK(sieve(X)) → A__SIEVE(mark(X))
MARK(sieve(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(zprimes) → A__ZPRIMES
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
(6) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MARK(sieve(X)) → A__SIEVE(mark(X))
A__SIEVE(cons(s(N), Y)) → MARK(N)
MARK(sieve(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(zprimes) → A__ZPRIMES
A__ZPRIMES → A__SIEVE(a__nats(s(s(0))))
A__ZPRIMES → A__NATS(s(s(0)))
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
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.
MARK(zprimes) → A__ZPRIMES
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(0) = 0
POL(A__NATS(x1)) = x1
POL(A__SIEVE(x1)) = x1
POL(A__ZPRIMES) = 0
POL(MARK(x1)) = x1
POL(a__filter(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + x2 + x3
POL(a__nats(x1)) = x1
POL(a__sieve(x1)) = x1
POL(a__zprimes) = 1
POL(cons(x1, x2)) = x1
POL(filter(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + x2 + x3
POL(mark(x1)) = x1
POL(nats(x1)) = x1
POL(s(x1)) = x1
POL(sieve(x1)) = x1
POL(zprimes) = 1
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__zprimes → zprimes
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
(8) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MARK(sieve(X)) → A__SIEVE(mark(X))
A__SIEVE(cons(s(N), Y)) → MARK(N)
MARK(sieve(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
A__ZPRIMES → A__SIEVE(a__nats(s(s(0))))
A__ZPRIMES → A__NATS(s(s(0)))
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(9) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.
(10) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A__SIEVE(cons(s(N), Y)) → MARK(N)
MARK(sieve(X)) → A__SIEVE(mark(X))
MARK(sieve(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(11) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
MARK(sieve(X)) → A__SIEVE(mark(X))
MARK(sieve(X)) → MARK(X)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [MATRO]:
POL(A__SIEVE(x1)) = | | + | | · | x1 |
POL(cons(x1, x2)) = | | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 |
POL(filter(x1, x2, x3)) = | | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 | + | | · | x3 |
POL(a__filter(x1, x2, x3)) = | | + | | · | x1 | + | | · | x2 | + | | · | x3 |
POL(a__sieve(x1)) = | | + | | · | x1 |
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__zprimes → zprimes
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
(12) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A__SIEVE(cons(s(N), Y)) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(13) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
(14) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(15) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
A__NATS(N) → MARK(N)
MARK(nats(X)) → MARK(X)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(0) = 0
POL(A__NATS(x1)) = 1 + x1
POL(MARK(x1)) = x1
POL(a__filter(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + x2
POL(a__nats(x1)) = 1 + x1
POL(a__sieve(x1)) = x1
POL(a__zprimes) = 1
POL(cons(x1, x2)) = x1
POL(filter(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + x2
POL(mark(x1)) = x1
POL(nats(x1)) = 1 + x1
POL(s(x1)) = x1
POL(sieve(x1)) = x1
POL(zprimes) = 1
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__zprimes → zprimes
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
(16) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MARK(nats(X)) → A__NATS(mark(X))
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(17) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
(18) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a__filter(cons(X, Y), 0, M) → cons(0, filter(Y, M, M))
a__filter(cons(X, Y), s(N), M) → cons(mark(X), filter(Y, N, M))
a__sieve(cons(0, Y)) → cons(0, sieve(Y))
a__sieve(cons(s(N), Y)) → cons(s(mark(N)), sieve(filter(Y, N, N)))
a__nats(N) → cons(mark(N), nats(s(N)))
a__zprimes → a__sieve(a__nats(s(s(0))))
mark(filter(X1, X2, X3)) → a__filter(mark(X1), mark(X2), mark(X3))
mark(sieve(X)) → a__sieve(mark(X))
mark(nats(X)) → a__nats(mark(X))
mark(zprimes) → a__zprimes
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(mark(X1), X2)
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(mark(X))
a__filter(X1, X2, X3) → filter(X1, X2, X3)
a__sieve(X) → sieve(X)
a__nats(X) → nats(X)
a__zprimes → zprimes
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(19) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.
(20) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(21) 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:
- MARK(s(X)) → MARK(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
- MARK(cons(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
(22) TRUE