(0) Obligation:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, 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:
A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x)
A(h, x) → A(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
A(h, x) → A(g, a(f, x))
A(h, x) → A(f, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, 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 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.
(4) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
A(h, x) → A(f, x)
A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a(f, a(f, x)) → a(x, x)
a(h, x) → a(f, a(g, a(f, x)))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
(5) 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:
h = h
f = f
a(x1, x2) = a(x2)
From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- A(f, a(f, x)) → A(x, x) (allowed arguments on rhs = {1, 2})
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 1, 2 > 2
- A(h, x) → A(f, x) (allowed arguments on rhs = {2})
The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2
We oriented the following set of usable rules [AAECC05,FROCOS05].
none
(6) TRUE