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:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
Q is empty.
The TRS is non-overlapping. Hence, we can switch to innermost.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
G2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> IF3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
G2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> F1(x)
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(s1(c1(y)), y)
F1(s1(x)) -> F1(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
G2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> IF3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
G2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> F1(x)
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(s1(c1(y)), y)
F1(s1(x)) -> F1(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph contains 2 SCCs with 2 less nodes.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F1(s1(x)) -> F1(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using an argument filtering and a montonic ordering, at least one Dependency Pair of this SCC can be strictly oriented.
F1(s1(x)) -> F1(x)
Used argument filtering: F1(x1) = x1
s1(x1) = s1(x1)
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence:
trivial
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
↳ QDP
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(s1(c1(y)), y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using an argument filtering and a montonic ordering, at least one Dependency Pair of this SCC can be strictly oriented.
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
G2(x, c1(y)) -> G2(s1(c1(y)), y)
Used argument filtering: G2(x1, x2) = x2
c1(x1) = c1(x1)
g2(x1, x2) = g
if3(x1, x2, x3) = if2(x2, x3)
s1(x1) = s
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence:
c_1 > g > if_2
c_1 > g > s
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ AND
↳ QDP
↳ QDP
↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f1(0) -> true
f1(1) -> false
f1(s1(x)) -> f1(x)
if3(true, x, y) -> x
if3(false, x, y) -> y
g2(s1(x), s1(y)) -> if3(f1(x), s1(x), s1(y))
g2(x, c1(y)) -> g2(x, g2(s1(c1(y)), y))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f1(0)
f1(1)
f1(s1(x0))
if3(true, x0, x1)
if3(false, x0, x1)
g2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
g2(x0, c1(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.