YES Termination w.r.t. Q proof of AProVE_07_otto05.ari

Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

0 QTRS
↳1 Overlay + Local Confluence (⇔, 0 ms)
↳2 QTRS
↳3 DependencyPairsProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳4 QDP
↳5 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳6 AND
    ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳9 QDP
        ↳10 QReductionProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳11 QDP
        ↳12 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳13 YES
    ↳14 QDP
        ↳15 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳16 QDP
        ↳17 QReductionProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳18 QDP
        ↳19 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳20 YES
    ↳21 QDP
        ↳22 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳23 QDP
        ↳24 QReductionProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳25 QDP
        ↳26 QDPOrderProof (⇔, 49 ms)
        ↳27 QDP
        ↳28 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳29 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
logarithm(x) → ifa(lt(0, x), x)
ifa(true, x) → help(x, 1)
ifa(false, x) → logZeroError
help(x, y) → ifb(lt(y, x), x, y)
ifb(true, x, y) → help(half(x), s(y))
ifb(false, x, y) → y
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

Q is empty.

(1) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost.

(2) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
logarithm(x) → ifa(lt(0, x), x)
ifa(true, x) → help(x, 1)
ifa(false, x) → logZeroError
help(x, y) → ifb(lt(y, x), x, y)
ifb(true, x, y) → help(half(x), s(y))
ifb(false, x, y) → y
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(4) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

LT(s(x), s(y)) → LT(x, y)
LOGARITHM(x) → IFA(lt(0, x), x)
LOGARITHM(x) → LT(0, x)
IFA(true, x) → HELP(x, 1)
HELP(x, y) → IFB(lt(y, x), x, y)
HELP(x, y) → LT(y, x)
IFB(true, x, y) → HELP(half(x), s(y))
IFB(true, x, y) → HALF(x)
HALF(s(s(x))) → HALF(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
logarithm(x) → ifa(lt(0, x), x)
ifa(true, x) → help(x, 1)
ifa(false, x) → logZeroError
help(x, y) → ifb(lt(y, x), x, y)
ifb(true, x, y) → help(half(x), s(y))
ifb(false, x, y) → y
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 3 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

(6) Complex Obligation (AND)

(7) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HALF(s(s(x))) → HALF(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
logarithm(x) → ifa(lt(0, x), x)
ifa(true, x) → help(x, 1)
ifa(false, x) → logZeroError
help(x, y) → ifb(lt(y, x), x, y)
ifb(true, x, y) → help(half(x), s(y))
ifb(false, x, y) → y
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(9) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HALF(s(s(x))) → HALF(x)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(10) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

(11) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HALF(s(s(x))) → HALF(x)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(12) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

  • HALF(s(s(x))) → HALF(x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(13) YES

(14) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

LT(s(x), s(y)) → LT(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
logarithm(x) → ifa(lt(0, x), x)
ifa(true, x) → help(x, 1)
ifa(false, x) → logZeroError
help(x, y) → ifb(lt(y, x), x, y)
ifb(true, x, y) → help(half(x), s(y))
ifb(false, x, y) → y
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(15) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(16) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

LT(s(x), s(y)) → LT(x, y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(17) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

(18) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

LT(s(x), s(y)) → LT(x, y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(19) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

  • LT(s(x), s(y)) → LT(x, y)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(20) YES

(21) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HELP(x, y) → IFB(lt(y, x), x, y)
IFB(true, x, y) → HELP(half(x), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
logarithm(x) → ifa(lt(0, x), x)
ifa(true, x) → help(x, 1)
ifa(false, x) → logZeroError
help(x, y) → ifb(lt(y, x), x, y)
ifb(true, x, y) → help(half(x), s(y))
ifb(false, x, y) → y
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(22) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(23) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HELP(x, y) → IFB(lt(y, x), x, y)
IFB(true, x, y) → HELP(half(x), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))
lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(24) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

logarithm(x0)
ifa(true, x0)
ifa(false, x0)
help(x0, x1)
ifb(true, x0, x1)
ifb(false, x0, x1)

(25) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HELP(x, y) → IFB(lt(y, x), x, y)
IFB(true, x, y) → HELP(half(x), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))
lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(26) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


IFB(true, x, y) → HELP(half(x), s(y))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO,RATPOLO]:

POL(0) = [1/2]   
POL(HELP(x1, x2)) = [4] + x1   
POL(IFB(x1, x2, x3)) = [4] + [1/4]x1 + [1/2]x2   
POL(false) = 0   
POL(half(x1)) = [1/4] + [1/2]x1   
POL(lt(x1, x2)) = [2]x2   
POL(s(x1)) = [2] + [2]x1   
POL(true) = [4]   
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 3/4.
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:

lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))

(27) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

HELP(x, y) → IFB(lt(y, x), x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

half(0) → 0
half(s(0)) → 0
half(s(s(x))) → s(half(x))
lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
half(0)
half(s(0))
half(s(s(x0)))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(28) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(29) TRUE