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(g(a)) → f(s(g(b)))
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS Reverse
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(g(a)) → f(s(g(b)))
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
Q is empty.
The following Q TRS is given: Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(g(a)) → f(s(g(b)))
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(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:
f(g(a)) → f(s(g(b)))
Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [25]:
POL(a) = 2
POL(b) = 0
POL(f(x1)) = x1
POL(g(x1)) = x1
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QTRS Reverse
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
Q is empty.
Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(x) → F(g(x))
G(x) → G(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QTRS Reverse
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(x) → F(g(x))
G(x) → G(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QTRS Reverse
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(x) → G(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ NonTerminationProof
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QTRS Reverse
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(x) → G(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:
G(x) → G(x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:none
s = G(x) evaluates to t =G(x)
Thus s starts an infinite chain as s semiunifies with t with the following substitutions:
- Semiunifier: [ ]
- Matcher: [ ]
Rewriting sequence
The DP semiunifies directly so there is only one rewrite step from G(x) to G(x).
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QDP
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ UsableRulesProof
↳ QDP
↳ QTRS Reverse
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
G(x) → G(x)
R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We have reversed the following QTRS:
The set of rules R is
f(g(a)) → f(s(g(b)))
f(f(x)) → b
g(x) → f(g(x))
The set Q is empty.
We have obtained the following QTRS:
a'(g(f(x))) → b'(g(s(f(x))))
f(f(x)) → b'(x)
g(x) → g(f(x))
The set Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ RRRPoloQTRSProof
↳ QTRS Reverse
↳ QTRS
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
a'(g(f(x))) → b'(g(s(f(x))))
f(f(x)) → b'(x)
g(x) → g(f(x))
Q is empty.