Certification Problem

Input (TPDB TRS_Innermost/Transformed_CSR_innermost_04/Ex4_7_77_Bor03_iGM)

The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.

Property / Task

Answer / Result

Proof (by AProVE @ termCOMP 2023)

1 Rule Removal

1.1 Dependency Pair Transformation

1.1.1 Dependency Graph Processor

The dependency pairs are split into 3 components.

• The 1^st component contains the pair

  mark#(cons(X1,X2))	→	mark#(X1)	(18)
  mark#(zeros)	→	active#(zeros)	(15)
  active#(zeros)	→	mark#(cons(0,zeros))	(13)

  1.1.1.1 Usable Rules Processor

  We restrict the rewrite rules to the following usable rules of the DP problem.

  There are no rules.

  1.1.1.1.1 Innermost Lhss Removal Processor

  We restrict the innermost strategy to the following left hand sides.

  cons(mark(x0),x1)

  cons(x0,mark(x1))

  cons(active(x0),x1)

  cons(x0,active(x1))

  1.1.1.1.1.1 Reduction Pair Processor

  Using the Knuth Bendix order with w0 = 1 and the following precedence and weight functions

  prec(zeros)	=	2		weight(zeros)	=	1
  prec(active#)	=	1		weight(active#)	=	1
  prec(0)	=	0		weight(0)	=	1

  in combination with the following argument filter

  π(mark#)	=	1
  π(cons)	=	1
  π(zeros)	=	[]
  π(active#)	=	[]
  π(0)	=	[]

  the pairs

  mark#(zeros)	→	active#(zeros)	(15)
  active#(zeros)	→	mark#(cons(0,zeros))	(13)

  could be deleted.

  1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Size-Change Termination

  Using size-change termination in combination with the subterm criterion one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.

  mark#(cons(X1,X2))	→	mark#(X1)	(18)
  1	>	1

  As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.

• The 2^nd component contains the pair

  cons#(X1,mark(X2))	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(21)
  cons#(mark(X1),X2)	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(20)
  cons#(active(X1),X2)	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(22)
  cons#(X1,active(X2))	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(23)

  1.1.1.2 Usable Rules Processor

  We restrict the rewrite rules to the following usable rules of the DP problem.

  There are no rules.

  1.1.1.2.1 Innermost Lhss Removal Processor

  We restrict the innermost strategy to the following left hand sides.

  active(zeros)

  active(tail(cons(x0,x1)))

  mark(zeros)

  mark(cons(x0,x1))

  mark(0)

  mark(tail(x0))

  1.1.1.2.1.1 Size-Change Termination

  Using size-change termination in combination with the subterm criterion one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.

  cons#(X1,mark(X2))	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(21)
  1	≥	1
  2	>	2
  cons#(mark(X1),X2)	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(20)
  1	>	1
  2	≥	2
  cons#(active(X1),X2)	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(22)
  1	>	1
  2	≥	2
  cons#(X1,active(X2))	→	cons#(X1,X2)	(23)
  1	≥	1
  2	>	2

  As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.

• The 3^rd component contains the pair

  tail#(active(X))	→	tail#(X)	(25)
  tail#(mark(X))	→	tail#(X)	(24)

  1.1.1.3 Usable Rules Processor

  We restrict the rewrite rules to the following usable rules of the DP problem.

  There are no rules.

  1.1.1.3.1 Innermost Lhss Removal Processor

  We restrict the innermost strategy to the following left hand sides.

  active(zeros)

  active(tail(cons(x0,x1)))

  mark(zeros)

  mark(cons(x0,x1))

  mark(0)

  mark(tail(x0))

  1.1.1.3.1.1 Size-Change Termination

  Using size-change termination in combination with the subterm criterion one obtains the following initial size-change graphs.

  tail#(active(X))	→	tail#(X)	(25)
  1	>	1
  tail#(mark(X))	→	tail#(X)	(24)
  1	>	1

  As there is no critical graph in the transitive closure, there are no infinite chains.