(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
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:
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, y)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, z)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(3) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, y)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
*1(
x0,
x1,
x2) =
*1(
x0)
Tags:
*1 has argument tags [1,1,1] and root tag 0
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(*1(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2
POL(+(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 + x2
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(4) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(5) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
(6) TRUE