(0) Obligation:
Clauses:
f(RES, [], RES).
f([], .(Head, Tail), RES) :- f(.(Head, Tail), Tail, RES).
f(.(Head, Tail), Y, RES) :- f(Y, Tail, RES).
Queries:
f(g,g,a).
(1) PrologToDTProblemTransformerProof (SOUND transformation)
Built DT problem from termination graph.
(2) Obligation:
Triples:
f1(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) :- f1(.(T25, T26), T26, T28).
f1([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) :- f1(.(T85, T86), T86, T88).
f1(.(T97, .(T119, T120)), [], T122) :- f1(.(T119, T120), T120, T122).
f1(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) :- f1(T137, T136, T139).
Clauses:
fc1(T5, [], T5).
fc1(.(T9, []), [], []).
fc1(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) :- fc1(.(T25, T26), T26, T28).
fc1([], .(T48, []), .(T48, [])).
fc1([], .(T68, []), []).
fc1([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) :- fc1(.(T85, T86), T86, T88).
fc1(.(T97, []), T106, T106).
fc1(.(T97, .(T119, T120)), [], T122) :- fc1(.(T119, T120), T120, T122).
fc1(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) :- fc1(T137, T136, T139).
Afs:
f1(x1, x2, x3) = f1(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:
f1_in: (b,b,f)
Transforming
TRIPLES into the following
Term Rewriting System:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) → U1_GGA(T9, T25, T26, T28, f1_in_gga(.(T25, T26), T26, T28))
F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T25, T26), T26, T28)
F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) → U2_GGA(T68, T85, T86, T88, f1_in_gga(.(T85, T86), T86, T88))
F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T85, T86), T86, T88)
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, .(T119, T120)), [], T122) → U3_GGA(T97, T119, T120, T122, f1_in_gga(.(T119, T120), T120, T122))
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) → U4_GGA(T97, T137, T135, T136, T139, f1_in_gga(T137, T136, T139))
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) → F1_IN_GGA(T137, T136, T139)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
f1_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
f1_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
[] =
[]
F1_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
F1_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U1_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U1_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U4_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U4_GGA(
x1,
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:
F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) → U1_GGA(T9, T25, T26, T28, f1_in_gga(.(T25, T26), T26, T28))
F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T25, T26), T26, T28)
F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) → U2_GGA(T68, T85, T86, T88, f1_in_gga(.(T85, T86), T86, T88))
F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T85, T86), T86, T88)
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, .(T119, T120)), [], T122) → U3_GGA(T97, T119, T120, T122, f1_in_gga(.(T119, T120), T120, T122))
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) → U4_GGA(T97, T137, T135, T136, T139, f1_in_gga(T137, T136, T139))
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) → F1_IN_GGA(T137, T136, T139)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
f1_in_gga(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
f1_in_gga(
x1,
x2)
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
[] =
[]
F1_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
F1_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2)
U1_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U1_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U2_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5) =
U3_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x5)
U4_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3,
x4,
x5,
x6) =
U4_GGA(
x1,
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 4 less nodes.
(6) Obligation:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136), T139) → F1_IN_GGA(T137, T136, T139)
F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), [], T28) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T25, T26), T26, T28)
F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86)), T88) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T85, T86), T86, T88)
R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(
x1,
x2) =
.(
x1,
x2)
[] =
[]
F1_IN_GGA(
x1,
x2,
x3) =
F1_IN_GGA(
x1,
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:
F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136)) → F1_IN_GGA(T137, T136)
F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), []) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T25, T26), T26)
F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86))) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T85, T86), T86)
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:
- F1_IN_GGA(.(T97, T137), .(T135, T136)) → F1_IN_GGA(T137, T136)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
- F1_IN_GGA(.(T9, .(T25, T26)), []) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T25, T26), T26)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 1 > 2
- F1_IN_GGA([], .(T68, .(T85, T86))) → F1_IN_GGA(.(T85, T86), T86)
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 1, 2 > 2
(10) YES