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
and(tt, X) → activate(X)
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
activate(X) → X
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
and(tt, X) → activate(X)
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
activate(X) → X
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
and(tt, X) → activate(X)
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
activate(X) → X
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
and(tt, X) → activate(X)
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
activate(X) → X
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(__(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 + x2
POL(activate(x1)) = 1 + x1
POL(and(x1, x2)) = 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(isNePal(x1)) = 2·x1
POL(nil) = 1
POL(tt) = 2
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
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))
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))
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(__(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + x2
↳ 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.