Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳4 AND
    ↳5 QDP
        ↳6 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)
        ↳7 TRUE
    ↳8 QDP
        ↳9 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)
        ↳10 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → app(app(f, x), y)
add → app(curry, plus)

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:

APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(app(plus, x), y)
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(plus, x)
APP(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → APP(app(f, x), y)
APP(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → APP(f, x)
ADD → APP(curry, plus)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → app(app(f, x), y)
add → app(curry, plus)

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 3 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(app(plus, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → app(app(f, x), y)
add → app(curry, plus)

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

(6) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We used the following order and afs together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] to show that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

Order:Homeomorphic Embedding Order

AFS:
plus  =  plus
s  =  s
app(x1, x2)  =  app(x2)

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

  • APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(app(plus, x), y) (allowed arguments on rhs = {1, 2})
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

We oriented the following set of usable rules [AAECC05,FROCOS05]. none

(7) TRUE

(8) Obligation:

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

APP(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → APP(app(f, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → app(app(f, x), y)
add → app(curry, plus)

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

(9) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We used the following order and afs together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] to show that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

Order:Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

0 > [app2, plus, s, curry]

Status:
app2: [1,2]
plus: multiset
0: multiset
s: multiset
curry: multiset

AFS:
app(x1, x2)  =  app(x1, x2)
plus  =  plus
0  =  0
s  =  s
curry  =  curry

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

  • APP(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → APP(f, x) (allowed arguments on rhs = {1, 2})
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 1 > 2

  • APP(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → APP(app(f, x), y) (allowed arguments on rhs = {1, 2})
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

We oriented the following set of usable rules [AAECC05,FROCOS05].


app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(app(curry, f), x), y) → app(app(f, x), y)

(10) TRUE