The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.
app(app(mapt,f),app(leaf,x)) | → | app(leaf,app(f,x)) | (1) |
app(app(mapt,f),app(node,xs)) | → | app(node,app(app(maptlist,f),xs)) | (2) |
app(app(maptlist,f),nil) | → | nil | (3) |
app(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app(app(cons,app(app(mapt,f),x)),app(app(maptlist,f),xs)) | (4) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(leaf,x)) | → | app#(f,x) | (5) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(leaf,x)) | → | app#(leaf,app(f,x)) | (6) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(node,xs)) | → | app#(maptlist,f) | (7) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(node,xs)) | → | app#(app(maptlist,f),xs) | (8) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(node,xs)) | → | app#(node,app(app(maptlist,f),xs)) | (9) |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(maptlist,f),xs) | (10) |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(mapt,f) | (11) |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(mapt,f),x) | (12) |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(cons,app(app(mapt,f),x)) | (13) |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(cons,app(app(mapt,f),x)),app(app(maptlist,f),xs)) | (14) |
The dependency pairs are split into 1 component.
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(maptlist,f),xs) | (10) |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(mapt,f),x) | (12) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(node,xs)) | → | app#(app(maptlist,f),xs) | (8) |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(leaf,x)) | → | app#(f,x) | (5) |
Using size-change termination in combination with the subterm criterion one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(maptlist,f),xs) | (10) |
2 | > | 2 | |
1 | ≥ | 1 | |
app#(app(maptlist,f),app(app(cons,x),xs)) | → | app#(app(mapt,f),x) | (12) |
2 | > | 2 | |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(node,xs)) | → | app#(app(maptlist,f),xs) | (8) |
2 | > | 2 | |
app#(app(mapt,f),app(leaf,x)) | → | app#(f,x) | (5) |
2 | > | 2 | |
1 | > | 1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.