(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
q(X, Y) :- m(X, Y, Z).
m(X, 0, X).
m(0, Y, 0) :- !.
m(X, Y, Z) :- ','(p(X, A), ','(p(Y, B), m(A, B, Z))).
p(0, 0).
p(s(X), X).
Queries:
q(g,g).
(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)
Built DT problem from termination graph.
(2) Obligation:
Triples:
m20(s(T28), X66) :- m20(T28, X66).
m3(s(T15), 0, X31) :- m20(T15, X31).
m3(s(T44), s(T48), X100) :- m3(T44, T48, X100).
q1(T5, T6) :- m3(T5, T6, X5).
Clauses:
mc20(T22, T22).
mc20(0, 0).
mc20(s(T28), X66) :- mc20(T28, X66).
mc3(T9, 0, T9).
mc3(0, 0, 0).
mc3(s(T15), 0, X31) :- mc20(T15, X31).
mc3(0, T35, 0).
mc3(s(T44), s(T48), X100) :- mc3(T44, T48, X100).
Afs:
q1(x1, x2) = q1(x1, x2)
(3) TriplesToPiDPProof (SOUND transformation)
We use the technique of [LOPSTR]. With regard to the inferred argument filtering the predicates were used in the following modes:
q1_in: (b,b)
m3_in: (b,b,f)
m20_in: (b,f)
Transforming
TRIPLES into the following
Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
Q1_IN_GG(T5, T6) → U4_GG(T5, T6, m3_in_gga(T5, T6, X5))
Q1_IN_GG(T5, T6) → M3_IN_GGA(T5, T6, X5)
M3_IN_GGA(s(T15), 0, X31) → U2_GGA(T15, X31, m20_in_ga(T15, X31))
M3_IN_GGA(s(T15), 0, X31) → M20_IN_GA(T15, X31)
M20_IN_GA(s(T28), X66) → U1_GA(T28, X66, m20_in_ga(T28, X66))
M20_IN_GA(s(T28), X66) → M20_IN_GA(T28, X66)
M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48), X100) → U3_GGA(T44, T48, X100, m3_in_gga(T44, T48, X100))
M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48), X100) → M3_IN_GGA(T44, T48, X100)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
m3_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
m3_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
0 =
0
m20_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
m20_in_ga(
x1)
Q1_IN_GG(
x1,
x2) =
Q1_IN_GG(
x1,
x2)
U4_GG(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U4_GG(
x1,
x2,
x3)
M3_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
M3_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U2_GGA(
x1,
x3)
M20_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
M20_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x3)
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
Infinitary Constructor Rewriting Termination of PiDP implies Termination of TRIPLES
(4) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
Q1_IN_GG(T5, T6) → U4_GG(T5, T6, m3_in_gga(T5, T6, X5))
Q1_IN_GG(T5, T6) → M3_IN_GGA(T5, T6, X5)
M3_IN_GGA(s(T15), 0, X31) → U2_GGA(T15, X31, m20_in_ga(T15, X31))
M3_IN_GGA(s(T15), 0, X31) → M20_IN_GA(T15, X31)
M20_IN_GA(s(T28), X66) → U1_GA(T28, X66, m20_in_ga(T28, X66))
M20_IN_GA(s(T28), X66) → M20_IN_GA(T28, X66)
M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48), X100) → U3_GGA(T44, T48, X100, m3_in_gga(T44, T48, X100))
M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48), X100) → M3_IN_GGA(T44, T48, X100)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
m3_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
m3_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
0 =
0
m20_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
m20_in_ga(
x1)
Q1_IN_GG(
x1,
x2) =
Q1_IN_GG(
x1,
x2)
U4_GG(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U4_GG(
x1,
x2,
x3)
M3_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
M3_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U2_GGA(
x1,
x3)
M20_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
M20_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x3)
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 2 SCCs with 6 less nodes.
(6) Complex Obligation (AND)
(7) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
M20_IN_GA(s(T28), X66) → M20_IN_GA(T28, X66)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
M20_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
M20_IN_GA(
x1)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(8) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(9) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
M20_IN_GA(s(T28)) → M20_IN_GA(T28)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(10) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.
From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- M20_IN_GA(s(T28)) → M20_IN_GA(T28)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
(11) YES
(12) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48), X100) → M3_IN_GGA(T44, T48, X100)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
s(
x1) =
s(
x1)
M3_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
M3_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(13) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(14) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48)) → M3_IN_GGA(T44, T48)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(15) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.
From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:
- M3_IN_GGA(s(T44), s(T48)) → M3_IN_GGA(T44, T48)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
(16) YES