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:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
Q is empty.
The following Q TRS is given: Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
Q is empty.
The following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [15] because they are oriented strictly by a polynomial ordering:
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(U11(x1)) = 2·x1
POL(U12(x1)) = 2·x1
POL(__(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2
POL(isNePal(x1)) = 1 + 2·x1
POL(nil) = 1
POL(tt) = 0
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
Q is empty.
The following Q TRS is given: Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
Q is empty.
The following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [15] because they are oriented strictly by a polynomial ordering:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(U11(x1)) = 2 + 2·x1
POL(U12(x1)) = 1 + 2·x1
POL(__(x1, x2)) = 1 + 2·x1 + x2
POL(tt) = 2
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ RisEmptyProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
R is empty.
Q is empty.
The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven.