(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)
minus(x, y) → help(lt(y, x), x, y)
help(true, x, y) → s(minus(x, s(y)))
help(false, x, y) → 0
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)
minus(x, y) → help(lt(y, x), x, y)
help(true, x, y) → s(minus(x, s(y)))
help(false, x, y) → 0
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
 
(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)
MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), x, y)
MINUS(x, y) → LT(y, x)
HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(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)
minus(x, y) → help(lt(y, x), x, y)
help(true, x, y) → s(minus(x, s(y)))
help(false, x, y) → 0
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
 
(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 1 less node.
(6) Complex Obligation (AND)
(7) 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)
minus(x, y) → help(lt(y, x), x, y)
help(true, x, y) → s(minus(x, s(y)))
help(false, x, y) → 0
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
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:
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))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
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))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
 
(11) 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.
 
(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:
- LT(s(x), s(y)) → LT(x, y)
 The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
 
(13) YES
(14) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), x, y)
HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(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)
minus(x, y) → help(lt(y, x), x, y)
help(true, x, y) → s(minus(x, s(y)))
help(false, x, y) → 0
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
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:
MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), x, y)
HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(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)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
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].
minus(x0, x1)
help(true, x0, x1)
help(false, x0, x1)
 
(18) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), x, y)
HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(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)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
 
(19) NonInfProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The DP Problem is simplified using the Induction Calculus [NONINF] with the following steps:
Note that 
final constraints are written in 
bold face.
For Pair 
MINUS(
x, 
y) → 
HELP(
lt(
y, 
x), 
x, 
y) the following chains were created:
- We consider the chain HELP(true, x2, x3) → MINUS(x2, s(x3)), MINUS(x4, x5) → HELP(lt(x5, x4), x4, x5) which results in the following constraint:
 | (1)    (MINUS(x2, s(x3))=MINUS(x4, x5) ⇒ MINUS(x4, x5)≥HELP(lt(x5, x4), x4, x5)) |  
 
 
 We simplified constraint (1) using rules (I), (II), (III) which results in the following new constraint:
 | (2)    (MINUS(x2, s(x3))≥HELP(lt(s(x3), x2), x2, s(x3))) |  
 
 
 
For Pair 
HELP(
true, 
x, 
y) → 
MINUS(
x, 
s(
y)) the following chains were created:
- We consider the chain MINUS(x6, x7) → HELP(lt(x7, x6), x6, x7), HELP(true, x8, x9) → MINUS(x8, s(x9)) which results in the following constraint:
 | (1)    (HELP(lt(x7, x6), x6, x7)=HELP(true, x8, x9) ⇒ HELP(true, x8, x9)≥MINUS(x8, s(x9))) |  
 
 
 We simplified constraint (1) using rules (I), (II), (III) which results in the following new constraint:
 | (2)    (lt(x7, x6)=true ⇒ HELP(true, x6, x7)≥MINUS(x6, s(x7))) |  
 
 
 We simplified constraint (2) using rule (V) (with possible (I) afterwards) using induction on lt(x7, x6)=true which results in the following new constraints:
 | (3)    (true=true ⇒ HELP(true, s(x12), 0)≥MINUS(s(x12), s(0))) |  
 
 | (4)    (lt(x15, x14)=true∧(lt(x15, x14)=true ⇒ HELP(true, x14, x15)≥MINUS(x14, s(x15))) ⇒ HELP(true, s(x14), s(x15))≥MINUS(s(x14), s(s(x15)))) |  
 
 
 We simplified constraint (3) using rules (I), (II) which results in the following new constraint:
 | (5)    (HELP(true, s(x12), 0)≥MINUS(s(x12), s(0))) |  
 
 
 We simplified constraint (4) using rule (VI) where we applied the induction hypothesis (lt(x15, x14)=true ⇒ HELP(true, x14, x15)≥MINUS(x14, s(x15))) with σ = [ ] which results in the following new constraint:
 | (6)    (HELP(true, x14, x15)≥MINUS(x14, s(x15)) ⇒ HELP(true, s(x14), s(x15))≥MINUS(s(x14), s(s(x15)))) |  
 
 
 
To summarize, we get the following constraints P
≥ for the following pairs.
- MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), x, y)
 - (MINUS(x2, s(x3))≥HELP(lt(s(x3), x2), x2, s(x3)))
 
 
 
- HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(x, s(y))
 - (HELP(true, s(x12), 0)≥MINUS(s(x12), s(0)))
 
- (HELP(true, x14, x15)≥MINUS(x14, s(x15)) ⇒ HELP(true, s(x14), s(x15))≥MINUS(s(x14), s(s(x15))))
 
 
 
The constraints for P
> respective P
bound are constructed from P
≥ where we just replace every occurence of "t ≥ s" in P
≥ by  "t > s" respective "t ≥ 
c". Here 
c stands for the fresh constant used for P
bound. 
Using the following integer polynomial ordering the  resulting constraints can be solved 
Polynomial interpretation [NONINF]:
POL(0) = 0   
POL(HELP(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + x2 - x3   
POL(MINUS(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 - x2   
POL(c) = -1   
POL(false) = 0   
POL(lt(x1, x2)) = 0   
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1   
POL(true) = 0   
The following pairs  are in P
>:
MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), x, y)
The following pairs are in P
bound:
HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(x, s(y))
The following rules are usable:
lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)
 
(20) Complex Obligation (AND)
(21) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
HELP(true, x, y) → MINUS(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)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
 
(22) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.
(23) TRUE
(24) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MINUS(x, y) → HELP(lt(y, x), 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)
The set Q consists of the following terms:
lt(0, s(x0))
lt(x0, 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
 
(25) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.
(26) TRUE