YES Confluence Proof

Confluence Proof

by csi

Input

The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.

f(g(h(x))) g(f(h(g(x))))
f(x) x
g(x) x
h(x) x

Proof

1 Redundant Rules Transformation

To prove that the TRS is (non-)confluent, we show (non-)confluence of the following modified system:

h(x) x
g(x) x
f(x) x
f(g(h(x))) g(f(h(g(x))))
f(g(h(x))) g(f(g(x)))
f(g(h(x))) g(f(h(x)))
f(g(h(x))) f(h(g(x)))
f(g(h(x))) g(h(g(x)))

All redundant rules that were added or removed can be simulated in 2 steps .

1.1 Critical Pair Closing System

Confluence is proven using the following terminating critical-pair-closing-system R:

g(x) x
h(x) x
f(x) x

1.1.1 Rule Removal

Using the linear polynomial interpretation over the naturals
[g(x1)] = 1 · x1 + 1
[h(x1)] = 1 · x1 + 1
[f(x1)] = 1 · x1 + 1
all rules could be removed.

1.1.1.1 R is empty

There are no rules in the TRS. Hence, it is terminating.

Tool configuration

csi