(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
select(X, .(X, Xs), Xs).
select(X, .(Y, Xs), .(Y, Zs)) :- select(X, Xs, Zs).
Queries:
select(a,g,a).
(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)
Built DT problem from termination graph.
(2) Obligation:
Triples:
select1(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) :- select1(T40, T38, T41).
select1(T78, .(T51, .(T75, T76)), .(T51, .(T75, T79))) :- select1(T78, T76, T79).
Clauses:
selectc1(T6, .(T6, T7), T7).
selectc1(T26, .(T13, .(T26, T27)), .(T13, T27)).
selectc1(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) :- selectc1(T40, T38, T41).
selectc1(T64, .(T51, .(T64, T65)), .(T51, T65)).
selectc1(T78, .(T51, .(T75, T76)), .(T51, .(T75, T79))) :- selectc1(T78, T76, T79).
Afs:
select1(x1, x2, x3) = select1(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:
select1_in: (f,b,f)
Transforming
TRIPLES into the following
Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) → U1_AGA(T40, T13, T37, T38, T41, select1_in_aga(T40, T38, T41))
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) → SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, T38, T41)
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T78, .(T51, .(T75, T76)), .(T51, .(T75, T79))) → U2_AGA(T78, T51, T75, T76, T79, select1_in_aga(T78, T76, T79))
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
select1_in_aga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
select1_in_aga(
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
SELECT1_IN_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
SELECT1_IN_AGA(
x2)
U1_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U1_AGA(
x2,
x3,
x4,
x6)
U2_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U2_AGA(
x2,
x3,
x4,
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:
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) → U1_AGA(T40, T13, T37, T38, T41, select1_in_aga(T40, T38, T41))
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) → SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, T38, T41)
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T78, .(T51, .(T75, T76)), .(T51, .(T75, T79))) → U2_AGA(T78, T51, T75, T76, T79, select1_in_aga(T78, T76, T79))
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
select1_in_aga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
select1_in_aga(
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
SELECT1_IN_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
SELECT1_IN_AGA(
x2)
U1_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U1_AGA(
x2,
x3,
x4,
x6)
U2_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U2_AGA(
x2,
x3,
x4,
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 2 less nodes.
(6) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, .(T13, .(T37, T38)), .(T13, .(T37, T41))) → SELECT1_IN_AGA(T40, T38, T41)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
SELECT1_IN_AGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
SELECT1_IN_AGA(
x2)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(7) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(8) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
SELECT1_IN_AGA(.(T13, .(T37, T38))) → SELECT1_IN_AGA(T38)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(9) 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:
- SELECT1_IN_AGA(.(T13, .(T37, T38))) → SELECT1_IN_AGA(T38)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
(10) YES