(0) Obligation:

Clauses:

flatten(atom(X), Y) :- ','(!, eq(Y, .(X, []))).
flatten(L, Y) :- ','(head(L, atom(H)), ','(!, ','(eq(Y, .(H, Z)), ','(tail(L, T), flatten(T, Z))))).
flatten(L, X) :- ','(head(L, cons(U, V)), ','(tail(L, W), flatten(cons(U, cons(V, W)), X))).
head(nil, X1).
head(cons(H, X2), H).
tail(nil, nil).
tail(cons(X3, T), T).
eq(X, X).

Queries:

flatten(g,a).

(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)

Built DT problem from termination graph.

(2) Obligation:

Triples:

flatten21(.(T45, T47)) :- flatten21(T47).
flatten1(nil, .(T26, T28)) :- flatten21(T28).
flatten1(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) :- flatten1(T79, T70).
flatten1(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) :- flatten1(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90).

Clauses:

flattenc21(.(T45, T47)) :- flattenc21(T47).
flattenc1(atom(T13), .(T13, [])).
flattenc1(nil, .(T26, T28)) :- flattenc21(T28).
flattenc1(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) :- flattenc1(T79, T70).
flattenc1(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) :- flattenc1(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90).

Afs:

flatten1(x1, x2)  =  flatten1(x1)

(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:
flatten1_in: (b,f)
flatten21_in: (f)
Transforming TRIPLES into the following Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FLATTEN1_IN_GA(nil, .(T26, T28)) → U2_GA(T26, T28, flatten21_in_a(T28))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(nil, .(T26, T28)) → FLATTEN21_IN_A(T28)
FLATTEN21_IN_A(.(T45, T47)) → U1_A(T45, T47, flatten21_in_a(T47))
FLATTEN21_IN_A(.(T45, T47)) → FLATTEN21_IN_A(T47)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) → U3_GA(T78, T79, T70, flatten1_in_ga(T79, T70))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(T79, T70)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) → U4_GA(T117, T118, T119, T90, flatten1_in_ga(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
flatten1_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  flatten1_in_ga(x1)
nil  =  nil
flatten21_in_a(x1)  =  flatten21_in_a
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x2)
cons(x1, x2)  =  cons(x1, x2)
atom(x1)  =  atom(x1)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1)
U2_GA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_GA(x3)
FLATTEN21_IN_A(x1)  =  FLATTEN21_IN_A
U1_A(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_A(x3)
U3_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4)  =  U3_GA(x1, x2, x4)
U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5)  =  U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x5)

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:

FLATTEN1_IN_GA(nil, .(T26, T28)) → U2_GA(T26, T28, flatten21_in_a(T28))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(nil, .(T26, T28)) → FLATTEN21_IN_A(T28)
FLATTEN21_IN_A(.(T45, T47)) → U1_A(T45, T47, flatten21_in_a(T47))
FLATTEN21_IN_A(.(T45, T47)) → FLATTEN21_IN_A(T47)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) → U3_GA(T78, T79, T70, flatten1_in_ga(T79, T70))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(T79, T70)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) → U4_GA(T117, T118, T119, T90, flatten1_in_ga(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
flatten1_in_ga(x1, x2)  =  flatten1_in_ga(x1)
nil  =  nil
flatten21_in_a(x1)  =  flatten21_in_a
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x2)
cons(x1, x2)  =  cons(x1, x2)
atom(x1)  =  atom(x1)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1)
U2_GA(x1, x2, x3)  =  U2_GA(x3)
FLATTEN21_IN_A(x1)  =  FLATTEN21_IN_A
U1_A(x1, x2, x3)  =  U1_A(x3)
U3_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4)  =  U3_GA(x1, x2, x4)
U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5)  =  U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x5)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 2 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

(6) Complex Obligation (AND)

(7) Obligation:

Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FLATTEN21_IN_A(.(T45, T47)) → FLATTEN21_IN_A(T47)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x2)
FLATTEN21_IN_A(x1)  =  FLATTEN21_IN_A

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:

FLATTEN21_IN_AFLATTEN21_IN_A

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.

(10) NonTerminationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We used the non-termination processor [FROCOS05] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly.

s = FLATTEN21_IN_A evaluates to t =FLATTEN21_IN_A

Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
  • Semiunifier: [ ]
  • Matcher: [ ]




Rewriting sequence

The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from FLATTEN21_IN_A to FLATTEN21_IN_A.



(11) NO

(12) Obligation:

Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119), T90) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)), T90)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79), .(T78, T70)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(T79, T70)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x2)
cons(x1, x2)  =  cons(x1, x2)
atom(x1)  =  atom(x1)
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1, x2)  =  FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1)

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:

FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(T79)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.

(15) UsableRulesReductionPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the usable rules with reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with a polynomial ordering [POLO], all dependency pairs and the corresponding usable rules [FROCOS05] can be oriented non-strictly. All non-usable rules are removed, and those dependency pairs and usable rules that have been oriented strictly or contain non-usable symbols in their left-hand side are removed as well.

The following dependency pairs can be deleted:

FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(cons(T117, T118), T119)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(T117, cons(T118, T119)))
FLATTEN1_IN_GA(cons(atom(T78), T79)) → FLATTEN1_IN_GA(T79)
No rules are removed from R.

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(FLATTEN1_IN_GA(x1)) = 2·x1   
POL(atom(x1)) = x1   
POL(cons(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + x2   

(16) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.

(17) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(18) YES