YES Confluence Proof

Confluence Proof

by csi

Input

The rewrite relation of the following TRS is considered.

+(x,y) +(y,x)
*(+(x,y),z) +(*(x,z),*(y,z))
*(+(y,x),z) +(*(x,z),*(y,z))

Proof

1 Redundant Rules Transformation

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

*(+(y,x),z) +(*(x,z),*(y,z))
*(+(x,y),z) +(*(x,z),*(y,z))
+(x,y) +(y,x)
*(+(y,x),z) +(*(y,z),*(x,z))
*(+(x,y),z) +(*(y,z),*(x,z))
+(x,y) +(x,y)

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

1.1 Development Closed

Confluence is proven since the TRS is development closed.

Tool configuration

csi