The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.
active(minus(0,Y)) |
→ |
mark(0) |
(1) |
active(minus(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(minus(X,Y)) |
(2) |
active(geq(X,0)) |
→ |
mark(true) |
(3) |
active(geq(0,s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(false) |
(4) |
active(geq(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(geq(X,Y)) |
(5) |
active(div(0,s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(0) |
(6) |
active(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(if(geq(X,Y),s(div(minus(X,Y),s(Y))),0)) |
(7) |
active(if(true,X,Y)) |
→ |
mark(X) |
(8) |
active(if(false,X,Y)) |
→ |
mark(Y) |
(9) |
active(s(X)) |
→ |
s(active(X)) |
(10) |
active(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div(active(X1),X2) |
(11) |
active(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if(active(X1),X2,X3) |
(12) |
s(mark(X)) |
→ |
mark(s(X)) |
(13) |
div(mark(X1),X2) |
→ |
mark(div(X1,X2)) |
(14) |
if(mark(X1),X2,X3) |
→ |
mark(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
(15) |
proper(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
minus(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(16) |
proper(0) |
→ |
ok(0) |
(17) |
proper(s(X)) |
→ |
s(proper(X)) |
(18) |
proper(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
geq(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(19) |
proper(true) |
→ |
ok(true) |
(20) |
proper(false) |
→ |
ok(false) |
(21) |
proper(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(22) |
proper(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if(proper(X1),proper(X2),proper(X3)) |
(23) |
minus(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(minus(X1,X2)) |
(24) |
s(ok(X)) |
→ |
ok(s(X)) |
(25) |
geq(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(geq(X1,X2)) |
(26) |
div(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(div(X1,X2)) |
(27) |
if(ok(X1),ok(X2),ok(X3)) |
→ |
ok(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
(28) |
top(mark(X)) |
→ |
top(proper(X)) |
(29) |
top(ok(X)) |
→ |
top(active(X)) |
(30) |
active#(minus(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
minus#(X,Y) |
(31) |
active#(geq(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
geq#(X,Y) |
(32) |
active#(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
minus#(X,Y) |
(33) |
active#(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
div#(minus(X,Y),s(Y)) |
(34) |
active#(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
s#(div(minus(X,Y),s(Y))) |
(35) |
active#(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
geq#(X,Y) |
(36) |
active#(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
if#(geq(X,Y),s(div(minus(X,Y),s(Y))),0) |
(37) |
active#(s(X)) |
→ |
active#(X) |
(38) |
active#(s(X)) |
→ |
s#(active(X)) |
(39) |
active#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
active#(X1) |
(40) |
active#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div#(active(X1),X2) |
(41) |
active#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
active#(X1) |
(42) |
active#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if#(active(X1),X2,X3) |
(43) |
s#(mark(X)) |
→ |
s#(X) |
(44) |
div#(mark(X1),X2) |
→ |
div#(X1,X2) |
(45) |
if#(mark(X1),X2,X3) |
→ |
if#(X1,X2,X3) |
(46) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(47) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(48) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
minus#(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(49) |
proper#(s(X)) |
→ |
proper#(X) |
(50) |
proper#(s(X)) |
→ |
s#(proper(X)) |
(51) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(52) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(53) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
geq#(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(54) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(55) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(56) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div#(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(57) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X3) |
(58) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(59) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(60) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if#(proper(X1),proper(X2),proper(X3)) |
(61) |
minus#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
minus#(X1,X2) |
(62) |
s#(ok(X)) |
→ |
s#(X) |
(63) |
geq#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
geq#(X1,X2) |
(64) |
div#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
div#(X1,X2) |
(65) |
if#(ok(X1),ok(X2),ok(X3)) |
→ |
if#(X1,X2,X3) |
(66) |
top#(mark(X)) |
→ |
proper#(X) |
(67) |
top#(mark(X)) |
→ |
top#(proper(X)) |
(68) |
top#(ok(X)) |
→ |
active#(X) |
(69) |
top#(ok(X)) |
→ |
top#(active(X)) |
(70) |
The dependency pairs are split into 8
components.
-
The
1st
component contains the
pair
top#(ok(X)) |
→ |
top#(active(X)) |
(70) |
top#(mark(X)) |
→ |
top#(proper(X)) |
(68) |
1.1.1 Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the
prec(top#) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(top#) |
= |
lex
|
prec(ok) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(ok) |
= |
lex
|
prec(proper) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(proper) |
= |
lex
|
prec(if) |
= |
2 |
|
stat(if) |
= |
lex
|
prec(div) |
= |
7 |
|
stat(div) |
= |
lex
|
prec(false) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(false) |
= |
lex
|
prec(true) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(true) |
= |
lex
|
prec(geq) |
= |
1 |
|
stat(geq) |
= |
lex
|
prec(s) |
= |
3 |
|
stat(s) |
= |
lex
|
prec(mark) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(mark) |
= |
lex
|
prec(active) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(active) |
= |
lex
|
prec(minus) |
= |
2 |
|
stat(minus) |
= |
lex
|
prec(0) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(0) |
= |
lex
|
π(top#) |
= |
1 |
π(ok) |
= |
1 |
π(proper) |
= |
1 |
π(if) |
= |
[1,2,3] |
π(div) |
= |
[1,2] |
π(false) |
= |
[] |
π(true) |
= |
[] |
π(geq) |
= |
[2] |
π(s) |
= |
[1] |
π(mark) |
= |
[1] |
π(active) |
= |
1 |
π(minus) |
= |
[1] |
π(0) |
= |
[] |
together with the usable
rules
active(minus(0,Y)) |
→ |
mark(0) |
(1) |
active(minus(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(minus(X,Y)) |
(2) |
active(geq(X,0)) |
→ |
mark(true) |
(3) |
active(geq(0,s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(false) |
(4) |
active(geq(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(geq(X,Y)) |
(5) |
active(div(0,s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(0) |
(6) |
active(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(if(geq(X,Y),s(div(minus(X,Y),s(Y))),0)) |
(7) |
active(if(true,X,Y)) |
→ |
mark(X) |
(8) |
active(if(false,X,Y)) |
→ |
mark(Y) |
(9) |
active(s(X)) |
→ |
s(active(X)) |
(10) |
active(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div(active(X1),X2) |
(11) |
active(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if(active(X1),X2,X3) |
(12) |
minus(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(minus(X1,X2)) |
(24) |
geq(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(geq(X1,X2)) |
(26) |
s(mark(X)) |
→ |
mark(s(X)) |
(13) |
s(ok(X)) |
→ |
ok(s(X)) |
(25) |
div(mark(X1),X2) |
→ |
mark(div(X1,X2)) |
(14) |
div(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(div(X1,X2)) |
(27) |
if(mark(X1),X2,X3) |
→ |
mark(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
(15) |
if(ok(X1),ok(X2),ok(X3)) |
→ |
ok(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
(28) |
proper(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
minus(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(16) |
proper(0) |
→ |
ok(0) |
(17) |
proper(s(X)) |
→ |
s(proper(X)) |
(18) |
proper(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
geq(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(19) |
proper(true) |
→ |
ok(true) |
(20) |
proper(false) |
→ |
ok(false) |
(21) |
proper(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div(proper(X1),proper(X2)) |
(22) |
proper(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if(proper(X1),proper(X2),proper(X3)) |
(23) |
(w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the reduction pair),
the
pair
top#(mark(X)) |
→ |
top#(proper(X)) |
(68) |
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1 Reduction Pair Processor with Usable Rules
Using the
prec(top#) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(top#) |
= |
lex
|
prec(ok) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(ok) |
= |
lex
|
prec(if) |
= |
1 |
|
stat(if) |
= |
lex
|
prec(div) |
= |
8 |
|
stat(div) |
= |
lex
|
prec(false) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(false) |
= |
lex
|
prec(true) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(true) |
= |
lex
|
prec(geq) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(geq) |
= |
lex
|
prec(s) |
= |
1 |
|
stat(s) |
= |
lex
|
prec(mark) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(mark) |
= |
lex
|
prec(active) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(active) |
= |
lex
|
prec(minus) |
= |
0 |
|
stat(minus) |
= |
lex
|
prec(0) |
= |
1 |
|
stat(0) |
= |
lex
|
π(top#) |
= |
1 |
π(ok) |
= |
[1] |
π(if) |
= |
[2,3] |
π(div) |
= |
[1] |
π(false) |
= |
[] |
π(true) |
= |
[] |
π(geq) |
= |
2 |
π(s) |
= |
[1] |
π(mark) |
= |
1 |
π(active) |
= |
1 |
π(minus) |
= |
1 |
π(0) |
= |
[] |
together with the usable
rules
active(minus(0,Y)) |
→ |
mark(0) |
(1) |
active(minus(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(minus(X,Y)) |
(2) |
active(geq(X,0)) |
→ |
mark(true) |
(3) |
active(geq(0,s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(false) |
(4) |
active(geq(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(geq(X,Y)) |
(5) |
active(div(0,s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(0) |
(6) |
active(div(s(X),s(Y))) |
→ |
mark(if(geq(X,Y),s(div(minus(X,Y),s(Y))),0)) |
(7) |
active(if(true,X,Y)) |
→ |
mark(X) |
(8) |
active(if(false,X,Y)) |
→ |
mark(Y) |
(9) |
active(s(X)) |
→ |
s(active(X)) |
(10) |
active(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
div(active(X1),X2) |
(11) |
active(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
if(active(X1),X2,X3) |
(12) |
minus(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(minus(X1,X2)) |
(24) |
geq(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(geq(X1,X2)) |
(26) |
s(mark(X)) |
→ |
mark(s(X)) |
(13) |
s(ok(X)) |
→ |
ok(s(X)) |
(25) |
div(mark(X1),X2) |
→ |
mark(div(X1,X2)) |
(14) |
div(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
ok(div(X1,X2)) |
(27) |
if(mark(X1),X2,X3) |
→ |
mark(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
(15) |
if(ok(X1),ok(X2),ok(X3)) |
→ |
ok(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
(28) |
(w.r.t. the implicit argument filter of the reduction pair),
the
pair
top#(ok(X)) |
→ |
top#(active(X)) |
(70) |
could be deleted.
1.1.1.1.1 P is empty
There are no pairs anymore.
-
The
2nd
component contains the
pair
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(60) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(59) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X3) |
(58) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(56) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(55) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(53) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(52) |
proper#(s(X)) |
→ |
proper#(X) |
(50) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(48) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(47) |
1.1.2 Subterm Criterion Processor
We use the projection
and remove the pairs:
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(60) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(59) |
proper#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
proper#(X3) |
(58) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(56) |
proper#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(55) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(53) |
proper#(geq(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(52) |
proper#(s(X)) |
→ |
proper#(X) |
(50) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X1) |
(48) |
proper#(minus(X1,X2)) |
→ |
proper#(X2) |
(47) |
1.1.2.1 P is empty
There are no pairs anymore.
-
The
3rd
component contains the
pair
active#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
active#(X1) |
(42) |
active#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
active#(X1) |
(40) |
active#(s(X)) |
→ |
active#(X) |
(38) |
1.1.3 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
active#(if(X1,X2,X3)) |
→ |
active#(X1) |
(42) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
active#(div(X1,X2)) |
→ |
active#(X1) |
(40) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
active#(s(X)) |
→ |
active#(X) |
(38) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
4th
component contains the
pair
minus#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
minus#(X1,X2) |
(62) |
1.1.4 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
minus#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
minus#(X1,X2) |
(62) |
|
2 |
> |
2 |
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
5th
component contains the
pair
geq#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
geq#(X1,X2) |
(64) |
1.1.5 Subterm Criterion Processor
We use the projection
and remove the pairs:
geq#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
geq#(X1,X2) |
(64) |
1.1.5.1 P is empty
There are no pairs anymore.
-
The
6th
component contains the
pair
s#(ok(X)) |
→ |
s#(X) |
(63) |
s#(mark(X)) |
→ |
s#(X) |
(44) |
1.1.6 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
s#(ok(X)) |
→ |
s#(X) |
(63) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
s#(mark(X)) |
→ |
s#(X) |
(44) |
|
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
7th
component contains the
pair
div#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
div#(X1,X2) |
(65) |
div#(mark(X1),X2) |
→ |
div#(X1,X2) |
(45) |
1.1.7 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
div#(ok(X1),ok(X2)) |
→ |
div#(X1,X2) |
(65) |
|
2 |
> |
2 |
1 |
> |
1 |
div#(mark(X1),X2) |
→ |
div#(X1,X2) |
(45) |
|
2 |
≥ |
2 |
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.
-
The
8th
component contains the
pair
if#(ok(X1),ok(X2),ok(X3)) |
→ |
if#(X1,X2,X3) |
(66) |
if#(mark(X1),X2,X3) |
→ |
if#(X1,X2,X3) |
(46) |
1.1.8 Size-Change Termination
Using size-change termination in combination with
the subterm criterion
one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.
if#(ok(X1),ok(X2),ok(X3)) |
→ |
if#(X1,X2,X3) |
(66) |
|
3 |
> |
3 |
2 |
> |
2 |
1 |
> |
1 |
if#(mark(X1),X2,X3) |
→ |
if#(X1,X2,X3) |
(46) |
|
3 |
≥ |
3 |
2 |
≥ |
2 |
1 |
> |
1 |
As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.