The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.
The dependency pairs are split into 5
components.
-
The
1st
component contains the
pair
mark#(h(X)) |
→ |
mark#(X) |
(32) |
mark#(f(X)) |
→ |
mark#(X) |
(30) |
1.1.1.1.1 Monotonic Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the linear polynomial interpretation over the naturals
[h(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[f(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[mark#(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
having no usable rules (w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the
reduction pair),
the
rule
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1.1.1 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
mark#(h(X)) |
→ |
mark#(X) |
(32) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
mark#(f(X)) |
→ |
mark#(X) |
(30) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
2nd
component contains the
pair
ok#(g(X)) |
→ |
ok#(X) |
(39) |
ok#(f(X)) |
→ |
ok#(X) |
(37) |
ok#(h(X)) |
→ |
ok#(X) |
(41) |
1.1.1.1.2 Monotonic Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the linear polynomial interpretation over the naturals
[g(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[f(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[h(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[ok#(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
having no usable rules (w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the
reduction pair),
the
rule
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1.2.1 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
ok#(g(X)) |
→ |
ok#(X) |
(39) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
ok#(f(X)) |
→ |
ok#(X) |
(37) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
ok#(h(X)) |
→ |
ok#(X) |
(41) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
3rd
component contains the
pair
f#(proper(X)) |
→ |
f#(X) |
(33) |
f#(active(X)) |
→ |
f#(X) |
(27) |
1.1.1.1.3 Monotonic Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the linear polynomial interpretation over the naturals
[proper(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[active(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[f#(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
having no usable rules (w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the
reduction pair),
the
rule
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1.3.1 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
f#(proper(X)) |
→ |
f#(X) |
(33) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
f#(active(X)) |
→ |
f#(X) |
(27) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
4th
component contains the
pair
h#(proper(X)) |
→ |
h#(X) |
(35) |
h#(active(X)) |
→ |
h#(X) |
(28) |
1.1.1.1.4 Monotonic Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the linear polynomial interpretation over the naturals
[proper(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[active(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[h#(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
having no usable rules (w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the
reduction pair),
the
rule
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1.4.1 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
h#(proper(X)) |
→ |
h#(X) |
(35) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
h#(active(X)) |
→ |
h#(X) |
(28) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
5th
component contains the
pair
g#(proper(X)) |
→ |
g#(X) |
(34) |
1.1.1.1.5 Monotonic Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the linear polynomial interpretation over the naturals
[proper(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
[g#(x1)] |
= |
1 · x1
|
having no usable rules (w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the
reduction pair),
the
rule
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1.5.1 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
g#(proper(X)) |
→ |
g#(X) |
(34) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.