(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
purge(nil) → nil
purge(.(x, y)) → .(x, purge(remove(x, y)))
remove(x, nil) → nil
remove(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), remove(x, z), .(y, remove(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:
PURGE(.(x, y)) → PURGE(remove(x, y))
PURGE(.(x, y)) → REMOVE(x, y)
REMOVE(x, .(y, z)) → REMOVE(x, z)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
purge(nil) → nil
purge(.(x, y)) → .(x, purge(remove(x, y)))
remove(x, nil) → nil
remove(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), remove(x, z), .(y, remove(x, z)))
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:
REMOVE(x, .(y, z)) → REMOVE(x, z)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
purge(nil) → nil
purge(.(x, y)) → .(x, purge(remove(x, y)))
remove(x, nil) → nil
remove(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), remove(x, z), .(y, remove(x, z)))
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.
REMOVE(x, .(y, z)) → REMOVE(x, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
REMOVE(
x0,
x1,
x2) =
REMOVE(
x0,
x2)
Tags:
REMOVE has argument tags [3,2,1] and root tag 0
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(.(x1, x2)) = 1 + x2
POL(REMOVE(x1, x2)) = 0
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(7) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
purge(nil) → nil
purge(.(x, y)) → .(x, purge(remove(x, y)))
remove(x, nil) → nil
remove(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), remove(x, z), .(y, remove(x, z)))
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:
PURGE(.(x, y)) → PURGE(remove(x, y))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
purge(nil) → nil
purge(.(x, y)) → .(x, purge(remove(x, y)))
remove(x, nil) → nil
remove(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), remove(x, z), .(y, remove(x, z)))
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.
PURGE(.(x, y)) → PURGE(remove(x, y))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
PURGE(
x0,
x1) =
PURGE(
x1)
Tags:
PURGE has argument tags [0,0] and root tag 0
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(.(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1
POL(=(x1, x2)) = 0
POL(PURGE(x1)) = 1
POL(if(x1, x2, x3)) = 0
POL(nil) = 0
POL(remove(x1, x2)) = 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:
purge(nil) → nil
purge(.(x, y)) → .(x, purge(remove(x, y)))
remove(x, nil) → nil
remove(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), remove(x, z), .(y, remove(x, z)))
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