Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be disproven:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(x, y) → f(x, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(y, x)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(x0, x1)
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(x, y) → f(x, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(y, x)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(x0, x1)
Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), y) → F(y, x)
F(x, y) → F(x, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(x, y) → f(x, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(y, x)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(x0, x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), y) → F(y, x)
F(x, y) → F(x, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(x, y) → f(x, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(y, x)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(x0, x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [15] we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), y) → F(y, x)
F(x, y) → F(x, x)
R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(x0, x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.
f(x0, x1)
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ NonTerminationProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), y) → F(y, x)
F(x, y) → F(x, x)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We used the non-termination processor [17] to show that the DP problem is infinite.
Found a loop by semiunifying a rule from P directly.
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(s(x), y) → F(y, x)
F(x, y) → F(x, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:none
s = F(x, y) evaluates to t =F(x, x)
Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Semiunifier: [ ]
- Matcher: [y / x]
Rewriting sequence
The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from F(x, y) to F(x, x).