(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(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:
ACTIVE(c) → MARK(f(g(c)))
ACTIVE(c) → F(g(c))
ACTIVE(c) → G(c)
ACTIVE(f(g(X))) → MARK(g(X))
MARK(c) → ACTIVE(c)
MARK(f(X)) → ACTIVE(f(X))
MARK(g(X)) → ACTIVE(g(X))
F(mark(X)) → F(X)
F(active(X)) → F(X)
G(mark(X)) → G(X)
G(active(X)) → G(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(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 3 SCCs with 4 less nodes.
(4) Complex Obligation (AND)
(5) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(active(X)) → G(X)
G(mark(X)) → G(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(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.
G(active(X)) → G(X)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
G(
x0,
x1) =
G(
x0,
x1)
Tags:
G has argument tags [1,0] and root tag 0
Comparison: MS
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
G(
x1) =
G
active(
x1) =
active(
x1)
mark(
x1) =
x1
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
trivial
Status:
G: []
active1: [1]
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(7) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(mark(X)) → G(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(8) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
G(mark(X)) → G(X)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
G(
x0,
x1) =
G(
x0)
Tags:
G has argument tags [0,1] and root tag 0
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
G(
x1) =
x1
mark(
x1) =
mark(
x1)
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
trivial
Status:
mark1: [1]
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(9) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(10) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
(11) TRUE
(12) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(active(X)) → F(X)
F(mark(X)) → F(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(13) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
F(active(X)) → F(X)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
F(
x0,
x1) =
F(
x0,
x1)
Tags:
F has argument tags [1,0] and root tag 0
Comparison: MS
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(
x1) =
F
active(
x1) =
active(
x1)
mark(
x1) =
x1
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
trivial
Status:
F: []
active1: [1]
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(14) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(mark(X)) → F(X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(15) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
F(mark(X)) → F(X)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
F(
x0,
x1) =
F(
x0)
Tags:
F has argument tags [0,1] and root tag 0
Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(
x1) =
x1
mark(
x1) =
mark(
x1)
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
trivial
Status:
mark1: [1]
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
none
(16) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(17) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
(18) TRUE
(19) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
ACTIVE(f(g(X))) → MARK(g(X))
MARK(f(X)) → ACTIVE(f(X))
MARK(g(X)) → ACTIVE(g(X))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(20) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
ACTIVE(f(g(X))) → MARK(g(X))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
ACTIVE(
x0,
x1) =
ACTIVE(
x0)
MARK(
x0,
x1) =
MARK(
x0,
x1)
Tags:
ACTIVE has argument tags [2,3] and root tag 1
MARK has argument tags [1,2] and root tag 1
Comparison: MIN
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACTIVE(
x1) =
x1
f(
x1) =
f
g(
x1) =
g
MARK(
x1) =
MARK
active(
x1) =
active
mark(
x1) =
mark
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
MARK > f > g
Status:
f: []
g: []
MARK: []
active: []
mark: []
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:
g(active(X)) → g(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
(21) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MARK(f(X)) → ACTIVE(f(X))
MARK(g(X)) → ACTIVE(g(X))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
active(c) → mark(f(g(c)))
active(f(g(X))) → mark(g(X))
mark(c) → active(c)
mark(f(X)) → active(f(X))
mark(g(X)) → active(g(X))
f(mark(X)) → f(X)
f(active(X)) → f(X)
g(mark(X)) → g(X)
g(active(X)) → g(X)
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(22) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.
(23) TRUE