(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(c(x, s(y))) → g(c(s(x), y))
f(c(s(x), y)) → f(c(x, s(y)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
f(x) → 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:
G(c(x, s(y))) → G(c(s(x), y))
F(c(s(x), y)) → F(c(x, s(y)))
F(f(x)) → F(d(f(x)))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(c(x, s(y))) → g(c(s(x), y))
f(c(s(x), y)) → f(c(x, s(y)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
f(x) → 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 2 SCCs with 1 less node.
(4) Complex Obligation (AND)
(5) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(c(s(x), y)) → F(c(x, s(y)))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(c(x, s(y))) → g(c(s(x), y))
f(c(s(x), y)) → f(c(x, s(y)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
f(x) → x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(6) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
F(c(s(x), y)) → F(c(x, s(y)))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
F(
x1) =
F(
x1)
Tags:
F has tags [0]
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(c(x1, x2)) = x1
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(7) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(c(x, s(y))) → g(c(s(x), y))
f(c(s(x), y)) → f(c(x, s(y)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
f(x) → x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(8) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
(9) TRUE
(10) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(c(x, s(y))) → G(c(s(x), y))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(c(x, s(y))) → g(c(s(x), y))
f(c(s(x), y)) → f(c(x, s(y)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
f(x) → x
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.
G(c(x, s(y))) → G(c(s(x), y))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
G(
x1) =
G(
x1)
Tags:
G has tags [0]
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(c(x1, x2)) = x2
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(12) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(c(x, s(y))) → g(c(s(x), y))
f(c(s(x), y)) → f(c(x, s(y)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
f(x) → x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(13) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
(14) TRUE