(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
g(W) :- ','(eq(X, .(.(a, []), .(.(R, []), []))), ','(eq(Y, .(.(S, .(c, [])), .([], []))), ','(app_1(X, Y, Z), ','(eq(Z, .(U, V)), app_2(U, U, W))))).
app_1([], X, X).
app_1(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) :- app_1(Xs, Ys, Zs).
app_2([], X, X).
app_2(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) :- app_2(Xs, Ys, Zs).
eq(X, X).
Queries:
g(a).
(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)
Built DT problem from termination graph.
(2) Obligation:
Triples:
app_289(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) :- app_289(T468, T470, T471, T469).
g1(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T413))))))))) :- ','(app_1c8(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15)), app_289(T412, T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412))))))), T413)).
Clauses:
app_2c89([], T451, T452, .(T451, T452)).
app_2c89(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) :- app_2c89(T468, T470, T471, T469).
app_1c8(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], []))))).
Afs:
g1(x1) = g1
(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:
g1_in: (f)
app_289_in: (f,f,f,f)
Transforming
TRIPLES into the following
Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G1_IN_A(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T413))))))))) → U2_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_1c8_in_aaa(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15)))
U2_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_1c8_out_aaa(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15))) → U3_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_289_in_aaaa(T412, T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412))))))), T413))
U2_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_1c8_out_aaa(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15))) → APP_289_IN_AAAA(T412, T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412))))))), T413)
APP_289_IN_AAAA(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) → U1_AAAA(T463, T468, T470, T471, T469, app_289_in_aaaa(T468, T470, T471, T469))
APP_289_IN_AAAA(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) → APP_289_IN_AAAA(T468, T470, T471, T469)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app_1c8_in_aaa(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], []))))) → app_1c8_out_aaa(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], [])))))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
app_1c8_in_aaa(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
app_1c8_in_aaa
app_1c8_out_aaa(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
app_1c8_out_aaa
app_289_in_aaaa(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
app_289_in_aaaa
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
G1_IN_A(
x1) =
G1_IN_A
U2_A(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6,
x7,
x8,
x9,
x10) =
U2_A(
x10)
U3_A(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6,
x7,
x8,
x9,
x10) =
U3_A(
x10)
APP_289_IN_AAAA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
APP_289_IN_AAAA
U1_AAAA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U1_AAAA(
x6)
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:
G1_IN_A(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T413))))))))) → U2_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_1c8_in_aaa(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15)))
U2_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_1c8_out_aaa(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15))) → U3_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_289_in_aaaa(T412, T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412))))))), T413))
U2_A(T414, T415, T416, T417, T418, T419, T420, T421, T413, app_1c8_out_aaa(X27, X54, .(.(T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412)))))))), T15))) → APP_289_IN_AAAA(T412, T414, .(T415, .(T416, .(T417, .(T418, .(T419, .(T420, .(T421, T412))))))), T413)
APP_289_IN_AAAA(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) → U1_AAAA(T463, T468, T470, T471, T469, app_289_in_aaaa(T468, T470, T471, T469))
APP_289_IN_AAAA(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) → APP_289_IN_AAAA(T468, T470, T471, T469)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app_1c8_in_aaa(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], []))))) → app_1c8_out_aaa(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], [])))))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
app_1c8_in_aaa(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
app_1c8_in_aaa
app_1c8_out_aaa(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
app_1c8_out_aaa
app_289_in_aaaa(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
app_289_in_aaaa
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
G1_IN_A(
x1) =
G1_IN_A
U2_A(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6,
x7,
x8,
x9,
x10) =
U2_A(
x10)
U3_A(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6,
x7,
x8,
x9,
x10) =
U3_A(
x10)
APP_289_IN_AAAA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
APP_289_IN_AAAA
U1_AAAA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U1_AAAA(
x6)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 1 SCC with 4 less nodes.
(6) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
APP_289_IN_AAAA(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) → APP_289_IN_AAAA(T468, T470, T471, T469)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app_1c8_in_aaa(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], []))))) → app_1c8_out_aaa(X134, X148, .(.(a, []), .(.(X134, []), .(.(X148, .(c, [])), .([], [])))))
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
app_1c8_in_aaa(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
app_1c8_in_aaa
app_1c8_out_aaa(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
app_1c8_out_aaa
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
APP_289_IN_AAAA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
APP_289_IN_AAAA
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(7) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.
(8) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
APP_289_IN_AAAA(.(T463, T468), T470, T471, .(T463, T469)) → APP_289_IN_AAAA(T468, T470, T471, T469)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
APP_289_IN_AAAA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
APP_289_IN_AAAA
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(9) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(10) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
APP_289_IN_AAAA → APP_289_IN_AAAA
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(11) 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 =
APP_289_IN_AAAA evaluates to t =
APP_289_IN_AAAAThus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Semiunifier: [ ]
- Matcher: [ ]
Rewriting sequenceThe DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from APP_289_IN_AAAA to APP_289_IN_AAAA.
(12) NO