Certification Problem

Input (COPS 546)

The rewrite relation of the following conditional TRS is considered.

g(x)	→	g(x)	\| g(x) ≈ f(a,b)
g(x)	→	f(x,x)

Property / Task

Prove or disprove confluence.

Answer / Result

Yes.

Proof (by ConCon @ CoCo 2020)

1 Removal of Infeasible Rules

We may safely remove rules with infeasible conditions. They do not influence the rewrite relation in any way.

1.1 Rules with Infeasible Conditions

1.1.1 Rule with Infeasible Conditions
The rule
g(x) → g(x) | g(x) ≈ f(a,b)
has infeasible conditions.
1.1.1.1 Infeasible Equation
The equation is infeasible.
1.1.1.1.1 Non-reachability
We show non-reachability w.r.t. the underlying TRS.
1.1.1.1.1.1 Non-reachability with reversed Rules
In the following we consider non-reachability w.r.t. reversed rewrite rules and further swapping source and target term.
1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Non-reachability by TCAP
Non-reachability is shown by the TCAP approximation.

1.2 Almost-orthogonal

The given (extended) properly oriented, right-stable, oriented 3-CTRS is almost-orthogonal, since there are no conditional critical pairs.