Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/AProVELiveness8.trs

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:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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:

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))
CHECK(f(x)) → CHECK(x)
MATCH(X, x) → PROPER(x)
ACTIVE(f(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
TOP(mark(x)) → CHECK(x)
ACTIVE(f(x)) → F(active(x))
CHECK(x) → MATCH(f(X), x)
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))
CHECK(f(x)) → F(check(x))
F(mark(x)) → F(x)
CHECK(x) → F(X)
MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → F(match(x, y))
PROPER(f(x)) → PROPER(x)
TOP(found(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
F(ok(x)) → F(x)
CHECK(x) → START(match(f(X), x))
TOP(active(c)) → TOP(mark(c))
MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → MATCH(x, y)
F(found(x)) → F(x)
PROPER(f(x)) → F(proper(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))
CHECK(f(x)) → CHECK(x)
MATCH(X, x) → PROPER(x)
ACTIVE(f(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
TOP(mark(x)) → CHECK(x)
ACTIVE(f(x)) → F(active(x))
CHECK(x) → MATCH(f(X), x)
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))
CHECK(f(x)) → F(check(x))
F(mark(x)) → F(x)
CHECK(x) → F(X)
MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → F(match(x, y))
PROPER(f(x)) → PROPER(x)
TOP(found(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
F(ok(x)) → F(x)
CHECK(x) → START(match(f(X), x))
TOP(active(c)) → TOP(mark(c))
MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → MATCH(x, y)
F(found(x)) → F(x)
PROPER(f(x)) → F(proper(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted some edges using various graph approximations

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

CHECK(f(x)) → CHECK(x)
TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))
MATCH(X, x) → PROPER(x)
ACTIVE(f(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
TOP(mark(x)) → CHECK(x)
ACTIVE(f(x)) → F(active(x))
CHECK(x) → MATCH(f(X), x)
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))
CHECK(f(x)) → F(check(x))
F(mark(x)) → F(x)
CHECK(x) → F(X)
MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → F(match(x, y))
PROPER(f(x)) → PROPER(x)
TOP(found(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
CHECK(x) → START(match(f(X), x))
F(ok(x)) → F(x)
MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → MATCH(x, y)
TOP(active(c)) → TOP(mark(c))
PROPER(f(x)) → F(proper(x))
F(found(x)) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 6 SCCs with 10 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

F(mark(x)) → F(x)
F(ok(x)) → F(x)
F(found(x)) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

F(found(x)) → F(x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

F(mark(x)) → F(x)
F(ok(x)) → F(x)

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1) = F(x1)
mark(x1) = x1
ok(x1) = x1
found(x1) = found(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[F₁, found_1]

Status:

found₁: [1]
F₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

F(mark(x)) → F(x)
F(ok(x)) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

F(mark(x)) → F(x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

F(ok(x)) → F(x)

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1) = F(x1)
mark(x1) = mark(x1)
ok(x1) = x1

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[F₁, mark_1]

Status:

mark₁: [1]
F₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

F(ok(x)) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

F(ok(x)) → F(x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1) = F(x1)
ok(x1) = ok(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[F₁, ok_1]

Status:

ok₁: [1]
F₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

ACTIVE(f(x)) → ACTIVE(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

ACTIVE(f(x)) → ACTIVE(x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACTIVE(x1) = ACTIVE(x1)
f(x1) = f(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[ACTIVE₁, f_1]

Status:

ACTIVE₁: [1]
f₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

PROPER(f(x)) → PROPER(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

PROPER(f(x)) → PROPER(x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
PROPER(x1) = PROPER(x1)
f(x1) = f(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[PROPER₁, f_1]

Status:

PROPER₁: [1]
f₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → MATCH(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

MATCH(f(x), f(y)) → MATCH(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
MATCH(x1, x2) = MATCH(x2)
f(x1) = f(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

f₁ > MATCH₁

Status:

f₁: [1]
MATCH₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

CHECK(f(x)) → CHECK(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

CHECK(f(x)) → CHECK(x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
CHECK(x1) = CHECK(x1)
f(x1) = f(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[CHECK₁, f_1]

Status:

f₁: [1]
CHECK₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(active(c)) → TOP(mark(c))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

TOP(active(c)) → TOP(mark(c))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
TOP(x1) = TOP(x1)
found(x1) = x1
active(x1) = x1
c = c
mark(x1) = mark
check(x1) = check
proper(x1) = proper
ok(x1) = x1
f(x1) = f
match(x1, x2) = x1
start(x1) = x1
X = X

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

[TOP₁, c] > [mark, check, f] > [proper, X]

Status:

X: multiset
c: multiset
f: []
check: []
TOP₁: [1]
proper: []
mark: []

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
active(f(x)) → mark(x)
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(check(x))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
TOP(x1) = x1
found(x1) = x1
active(x1) = x1
mark(x1) = mark(x1)
check(x1) = x1
proper(x1) = x1
c = c
ok(x1) = x1
f(x1) = f(x1)
match(x1, x2) = x2
start(x1) = x1
X = X

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

c > [mark₁, f₁, X]

Status:

mark₁: [1]
X: multiset
f₁: [1]
c: multiset

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

proper(c) → ok(c)
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
active(f(x)) → mark(x)
match(X, x) → proper(x)
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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 oriented strictly and are deleted.

TOP(found(x)) → TOP(active(x))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
TOP(x1) = x1
found(x1) = found(x1)
active(x1) = active(x1)
f(x1) = x1
mark(x1) = x1
ok(x1) = ok(x1)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

found₁ > active₁ > ok₁

Status:

found₁: [1]
active₁: [1]
ok₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

f(mark(x)) → mark(f(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
active(f(x)) → mark(x)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ PisEmptyProof

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(x)) → mark(x)
top(active(c)) → top(mark(c))
top(mark(x)) → top(check(x))
check(f(x)) → f(check(x))
check(x) → start(match(f(X), x))
match(f(x), f(y)) → f(match(x, y))
match(X, x) → proper(x)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(f(x)) → f(proper(x))
f(ok(x)) → ok(f(x))
start(ok(x)) → found(x)
f(found(x)) → found(f(x))
top(found(x)) → top(active(x))
active(f(x)) → f(active(x))
f(mark(x)) → mark(f(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.