(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
perm([], []).
perm(.(X, L), Z) :- ','(perm(L, Y), insert(X, Y, Z)).
insert(X, [], .(X, [])).
insert(X, L, .(X, L)).
insert(X, .(H, L1), .(H, L2)) :- insert(X, L1, L2).
Queries:
perm(g,a).
(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)
Built DT problem from termination graph.
(2) Obligation:
Triples:
perm28(.(T34, T35), X68) :- perm28(T35, X67).
perm28(.(T34, T35), X68) :- ','(permc28(T35, T36), insert39(T34, T36, X68)).
insert39(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) :- insert39(T60, T62, X104).
insert53(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) :- insert53(T95, T97, T99).
perm1(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) :- perm28(T28, X50).
perm1(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) :- ','(permc28(T28, T29), insert39(T27, T29, X51)).
perm1(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) :- ','(permc28(T28, T29), ','(insertc39(T27, T29, T67), insert53(T6, T67, T9))).
Clauses:
permc28([], []).
permc28(.(T34, T35), X68) :- ','(permc28(T35, T36), insertc39(T34, T36, X68)).
insertc39(T43, [], .(T43, [])).
insertc39(T52, T53, .(T52, T53)).
insertc39(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) :- insertc39(T60, T62, X104).
insertc53(T76, [], .(T76, [])).
insertc53(T85, T86, .(T85, T86)).
insertc53(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) :- insertc53(T95, T97, T99).
Afs:
perm1(x1, x2) = perm1(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:
perm1_in: (b,f)
perm28_in: (b,f)
permc28_in: (b,f)
insertc39_in: (b,b,f)
insert39_in: (b,b,f)
insert53_in: (b,b,f)
Transforming
TRIPLES into the following
Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
PERM1_IN_GA(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) → U6_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, perm28_in_ga(T28, X50))
PERM1_IN_GA(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) → PERM28_IN_GA(T28, X50)
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → U1_GA(T34, T35, X68, perm28_in_ga(T35, X67))
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → PERM28_IN_GA(T35, X67)
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → U2_GA(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U2_GA(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U3_GA(T34, T35, X68, insert39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
U2_GA(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T34, T36, X68)
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U4_GGA(T60, T61, T62, X104, insert39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, T62, X104)
PERM1_IN_GA(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) → U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_in_ga(T28, T29))
U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_out_ga(T28, T29)) → U8_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insert39_in_gga(T27, T29, X51))
U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_out_ga(T28, T29)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T27, T29, X51)
U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_out_ga(T28, T29)) → U9_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insertc39_in_gga(T27, T29, T67))
U9_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insertc39_out_gga(T27, T29, T67)) → U10_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insert53_in_gga(T6, T67, T9))
U9_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insertc39_out_gga(T27, T29, T67)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T6, T67, T9)
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) → U5_GGA(T95, T96, T97, T99, insert53_in_gga(T95, T97, T99))
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, T97, T99)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
permc28_in_ga([], []) → permc28_out_ga([], [])
permc28_in_ga(.(T34, T35), X68) → U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
insertc39_in_gga(T43, [], .(T43, [])) → insertc39_out_gga(T43, [], .(T43, []))
insertc39_in_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53)) → insertc39_out_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53))
insertc39_in_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_out_gga(T60, T62, X104)) → insertc39_out_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104))
U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_out_gga(T34, T36, X68)) → permc28_out_ga(.(T34, T35), X68)
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
perm28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
perm28_in_ga(
x1)
permc28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3)
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
insert39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insert39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insert53_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insert53_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
PERM1_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
PERM1_IN_GA(
x1)
U6_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U6_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U2_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U2_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U3_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U3_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U4_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U4_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U7_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U7_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U8_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U8_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U9_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U9_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U10_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U10_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U5_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U5_GGA(
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:
PERM1_IN_GA(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) → U6_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, perm28_in_ga(T28, X50))
PERM1_IN_GA(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) → PERM28_IN_GA(T28, X50)
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → U1_GA(T34, T35, X68, perm28_in_ga(T35, X67))
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → PERM28_IN_GA(T35, X67)
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → U2_GA(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U2_GA(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U3_GA(T34, T35, X68, insert39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
U2_GA(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T34, T36, X68)
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U4_GGA(T60, T61, T62, X104, insert39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, T62, X104)
PERM1_IN_GA(.(T6, .(T27, T28)), T9) → U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_in_ga(T28, T29))
U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_out_ga(T28, T29)) → U8_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insert39_in_gga(T27, T29, X51))
U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_out_ga(T28, T29)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T27, T29, X51)
U7_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, permc28_out_ga(T28, T29)) → U9_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insertc39_in_gga(T27, T29, T67))
U9_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insertc39_out_gga(T27, T29, T67)) → U10_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insert53_in_gga(T6, T67, T9))
U9_GA(T6, T27, T28, T9, insertc39_out_gga(T27, T29, T67)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T6, T67, T9)
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) → U5_GGA(T95, T96, T97, T99, insert53_in_gga(T95, T97, T99))
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, T97, T99)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
permc28_in_ga([], []) → permc28_out_ga([], [])
permc28_in_ga(.(T34, T35), X68) → U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
insertc39_in_gga(T43, [], .(T43, [])) → insertc39_out_gga(T43, [], .(T43, []))
insertc39_in_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53)) → insertc39_out_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53))
insertc39_in_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_out_gga(T60, T62, X104)) → insertc39_out_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104))
U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_out_gga(T34, T36, X68)) → permc28_out_ga(.(T34, T35), X68)
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
perm28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
perm28_in_ga(
x1)
permc28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3)
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
insert39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insert39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insert53_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insert53_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
PERM1_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
PERM1_IN_GA(
x1)
U6_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U6_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1)
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U1_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U2_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U2_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U3_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U3_GA(
x1,
x2,
x4)
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U4_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U4_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U7_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U7_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U8_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U8_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U9_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U9_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U10_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U10_GA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U5_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U5_GGA(
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 3 SCCs with 14 less nodes.
(6) Complex Obligation (AND)
(7) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, T97, T99)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
permc28_in_ga([], []) → permc28_out_ga([], [])
permc28_in_ga(.(T34, T35), X68) → U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
insertc39_in_gga(T43, [], .(T43, [])) → insertc39_out_gga(T43, [], .(T43, []))
insertc39_in_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53)) → insertc39_out_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53))
insertc39_in_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_out_gga(T60, T62, X104)) → insertc39_out_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104))
U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_out_gga(T34, T36, X68)) → permc28_out_ga(.(T34, T35), X68)
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
permc28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3)
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.
(9) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97), .(T96, T99)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, T97, T99)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT53_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(10) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(11) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, T97)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(12) 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:
- INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, .(T96, T97)) → INSERT53_IN_GGA(T95, T97)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2
(13) YES
(14) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, T62, X104)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
permc28_in_ga([], []) → permc28_out_ga([], [])
permc28_in_ga(.(T34, T35), X68) → U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
insertc39_in_gga(T43, [], .(T43, [])) → insertc39_out_gga(T43, [], .(T43, []))
insertc39_in_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53)) → insertc39_out_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53))
insertc39_in_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_out_gga(T60, T62, X104)) → insertc39_out_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104))
U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_out_gga(T34, T36, X68)) → permc28_out_ga(.(T34, T35), X68)
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
permc28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3)
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(15) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.
(16) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, T62, X104)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
INSERT39_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(17) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(18) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, T62)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(19) 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:
- INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, .(T61, T62)) → INSERT39_IN_GGA(T60, T62)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2
(20) YES
(21) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → PERM28_IN_GA(T35, X67)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
permc28_in_ga([], []) → permc28_out_ga([], [])
permc28_in_ga(.(T34, T35), X68) → U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_in_ga(T35, T36))
U12_ga(T34, T35, X68, permc28_out_ga(T35, T36)) → U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_in_gga(T34, T36, X68))
insertc39_in_gga(T43, [], .(T43, [])) → insertc39_out_gga(T43, [], .(T43, []))
insertc39_in_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53)) → insertc39_out_gga(T52, T53, .(T52, T53))
insertc39_in_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104)) → U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_in_gga(T60, T62, X104))
U14_gga(T60, T61, T62, X104, insertc39_out_gga(T60, T62, X104)) → insertc39_out_gga(T60, .(T61, T62), .(T61, X104))
U13_ga(T34, T35, X68, insertc39_out_gga(T34, T36, X68)) → permc28_out_ga(.(T34, T35), X68)
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
permc28_in_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_in_ga(
x1)
[] =
[]
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2) =
permc28_out_ga(
x1,
x2)
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U12_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4) =
U13_ga(
x1,
x2,
x4)
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
insertc39_out_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3)
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U14_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(22) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.
(23) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35), X68) → PERM28_IN_GA(T35, X67)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1,
x2) =
PERM28_IN_GA(
x1)
We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains
(24) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)
Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.
(25) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35)) → PERM28_IN_GA(T35)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(26) 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:
- PERM28_IN_GA(.(T34, T35)) → PERM28_IN_GA(T35)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
(27) YES