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:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
Using Dependency Pairs [1,13] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F2(a, x) -> G1(x)
F2(a, x) -> F2(g1(x), x)
G1(h1(x)) -> G1(x)
H1(g1(x)) -> H1(a)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> 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:
F2(a, x) -> G1(x)
F2(a, x) -> F2(g1(x), x)
G1(h1(x)) -> G1(x)
H1(g1(x)) -> H1(a)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 2 SCCs with 2 less nodes.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G1(h1(x)) -> G1(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].
The following pairs can be strictly oriented and are deleted.
G1(h1(x)) -> G1(x)
The remaining pairs can at least by weakly be oriented.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
G1(x1) = G1(x1)
h1(x1) = h1(x1)
Lexicographic Path Order [19].
Precedence:
h1 > G1
The following usable rules [14] were oriented:
none
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F2(a, x) -> F2(g1(x), x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].
The following pairs can be strictly oriented and are deleted.
F2(a, x) -> F2(g1(x), x)
The remaining pairs can at least by weakly be oriented.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F2(x1, x2) = F1(x1)
a = a
g1(x1) = g
h1(x1) = h
Lexicographic Path Order [19].
Precedence:
a > F1 > [g, h]
The following usable rules [14] were oriented:
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f2(a, x) -> f2(g1(x), x)
h1(g1(x)) -> h1(a)
g1(h1(x)) -> g1(x)
h1(h1(x)) -> x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.