YES Termination w.r.t. Q proof of Applicative_05_TakeDropWhile.ari

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

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳4 QDP
↳5 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 1 ms)
↳6 QDP
↳7 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳8 YES

(0) Obligation:

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

app(app(app(if, true), x), y) → x
app(app(app(if, true), x), y) → y
app(app(takeWhile, p), nil) → nil
app(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(cons, x), app(app(takeWhile, p), xs))), nil)
app(app(dropWhile, p), nil) → nil
app(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(dropWhile, p), xs)), app(app(cons, x), xs))

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(2) Obligation:

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

APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(cons, x), app(app(takeWhile, p), xs))), nil)
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(cons, x), app(app(takeWhile, p), xs)))
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(if, app(p, x))
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(cons, x), app(app(takeWhile, p), xs))
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(takeWhile, p), xs)
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(dropWhile, p), xs)), app(app(cons, x), xs))
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(dropWhile, p), xs))
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(if, app(p, x))
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(dropWhile, p), xs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(app(if, true), x), y) → x
app(app(app(if, true), x), y) → y
app(app(takeWhile, p), nil) → nil
app(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(cons, x), app(app(takeWhile, p), xs))), nil)
app(app(dropWhile, p), nil) → nil
app(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(dropWhile, p), xs)), app(app(cons, x), xs))

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

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 7 less nodes.

(4) Obligation:

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

APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(takeWhile, p), xs)
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(dropWhile, p), xs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(app(if, true), x), y) → x
app(app(app(if, true), x), y) → y
app(app(takeWhile, p), nil) → nil
app(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(cons, x), app(app(takeWhile, p), xs))), nil)
app(app(dropWhile, p), nil) → nil
app(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(if, app(p, x)), app(app(dropWhile, p), xs)), app(app(cons, x), xs))

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

(5) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(6) Obligation:

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

APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(takeWhile, p), xs)
APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(dropWhile, p), xs)

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

(7) 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:

  • APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(dropWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(dropWhile, p), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(p, x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(takeWhile, p), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(takeWhile, p), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

(8) YES