The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.
app(app(append,nil),l) | → | l | (1) |
app(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app(app(cons,h),app(app(append,t),l)) | (2) |
app(app(map,f),nil) | → | nil | (3) |
app(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app(app(cons,app(f,h)),app(app(map,f),t)) | (4) |
app(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app(app(append,l1),app(app(append,l2),l3)) | (5) |
app(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app(app(append,app(app(map,f),l1)),app(app(map,f),l2)) | (6) |
app#(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app#(append,t) | (7) |
app#(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app#(app(append,t),l) | (8) |
app#(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app#(app(cons,h),app(app(append,t),l)) | (9) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(app(map,f),t) | (10) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(f,h) | (11) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(cons,app(f,h)) | (12) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(app(cons,app(f,h)),app(app(map,f),t)) | (13) |
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(append,l2) | (14) |
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(app(append,l2),l3) | (15) |
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(app(append,l1),app(app(append,l2),l3)) | (16) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(map,f),l2) | (17) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(map,f),l1) | (18) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(append,app(app(map,f),l1)) | (19) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(append,app(app(map,f),l1)),app(app(map,f),l2)) | (20) |
The dependency pairs are split into 2 components.
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(app(map,f),t) | (10) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(map,f),l1) | (18) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(map,f),l2) | (17) |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(f,h) | (11) |
Using size-change termination in combination with the subterm criterion one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(app(map,f),t) | (10) |
2 | > | 2 | |
1 | ≥ | 1 | |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(map,f),l1) | (18) |
2 | > | 2 | |
1 | ≥ | 1 | |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(append,l1),l2)) | → | app#(app(map,f),l2) | (17) |
2 | > | 2 | |
1 | ≥ | 1 | |
app#(app(map,f),app(app(cons,h),t)) | → | app#(f,h) | (11) |
2 | > | 2 | |
1 | > | 1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(app(append,l1),app(app(append,l2),l3)) | (16) |
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(app(append,l2),l3) | (15) |
app#(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app#(app(append,t),l) | (8) |
[nil] | = | 5 |
[cons] | = | 3 |
[app#(x1, x2)] | = | 2 · x1 + -∞ · x2 + -16 |
[append] | = | 1 |
[app(x1, x2)] | = | 1 · x1 + 0 · x2 + -16 |
app(app(append,nil),l) | → | l | (1) |
app(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app(app(cons,h),app(app(append,t),l)) | (2) |
app(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app(app(append,l1),app(app(append,l2),l3)) | (5) |
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(app(append,l1),app(app(append,l2),l3)) | (16) |
prec(app#) | = | 0 | stat(app#) | = | lex | |
prec(cons) | = | 0 | stat(cons) | = | lex | |
prec(app) | = | 0 | stat(app) | = | lex | |
prec(append) | = | 0 | stat(append) | = | lex |
π(app#) | = | 1 |
π(cons) | = | [] |
π(app) | = | [2] |
π(append) | = | [] |
app#(app(append,app(app(append,l1),l2)),l3) | → | app#(app(append,l2),l3) | (15) |
app#(app(append,app(app(cons,h),t)),l) | → | app#(app(append,t),l) | (8) |
There are no pairs anymore.