Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be proven:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))
Q is empty.
The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [19] we can switch to innermost.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(0, 1, x0)
f(x0, x1, s(x2))
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(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(0, 1, x0)
f(x0, x1, s(x2))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(0, 1, x0)
f(x0, x1, s(x2))
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
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)
R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:
f(0, 1, x0)
f(x0, x1, s(x2))
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(0, 1, x0)
f(x0, x1, s(x2))
↳ QTRS
↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QReductionProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:
- F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)
The graph contains the following edges 3 > 3
- F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
The graph contains the following edges 3 >= 2, 3 >= 3