(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(a, empty) → g(a, empty)
f(a, cons(x, k)) → f(cons(x, a), k)
g(empty, d) → d
g(cons(x, k), d) → g(k, cons(x, d))
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:
F(a, empty) → G(a, empty)
F(a, cons(x, k)) → F(cons(x, a), k)
G(cons(x, k), d) → G(k, cons(x, d))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(a, empty) → g(a, empty)
f(a, cons(x, k)) → f(cons(x, a), k)
g(empty, d) → d
g(cons(x, k), d) → g(k, cons(x, d))
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:
G(cons(x, k), d) → G(k, cons(x, d))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(a, empty) → g(a, empty)
f(a, cons(x, k)) → f(cons(x, a), k)
g(empty, d) → d
g(cons(x, k), d) → g(k, cons(x, d))
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:
cons(x1, x2) = cons(x2)
From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- G(cons(x, k), d) → G(k, cons(x, d)) (allowed arguments on rhs = {1, 2})
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
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:
F(a, cons(x, k)) → F(cons(x, a), k)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(a, empty) → g(a, empty)
f(a, cons(x, k)) → f(cons(x, a), k)
g(empty, d) → d
g(cons(x, k), d) → g(k, cons(x, d))
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:Homeomorphic Embedding Order
AFS:
cons(x1, x2) = cons(x2)
From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- F(a, cons(x, k)) → F(cons(x, a), k) (allowed arguments on rhs = {1, 2})
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2
We oriented the following set of usable rules [AAECC05,FROCOS05].
none
(10) TRUE