YES Termination w.r.t. Q proof of Various_04_13.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 AND
    ↳5 QDP
        ↳6 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 MRRProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳9 QDP
        ↳10 PisEmptyProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳11 YES
    ↳12 QDP
        ↳13 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳14 QDP
        ↳15 MRRProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳16 QDP
        ↳17 PisEmptyProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳18 YES
    ↳19 QDP
        ↳20 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳21 QDP
        ↳22 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳23 YES

(0) Obligation:

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

O(0) → 0
+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
*(0, x) → 0
*(x, 0) → 0
*(O(x), y) → O(*(x, y))
*(I(x), y) → +(O(*(x, y)), y)
-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))

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:

+1(O(x), O(y)) → O1(+(x, y))
+1(O(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(O(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), I(y)) → O1(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(+(x, y), I(0))
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)
*1(O(x), y) → O1(*(x, y))
*1(O(x), y) → *1(x, y)
*1(I(x), y) → +1(O(*(x, y)), y)
*1(I(x), y) → O1(*(x, y))
*1(I(x), y) → *1(x, y)
-1(O(x), O(y)) → O1(-(x, y))
-1(O(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(-(x, y), I(1))
-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), I(y)) → O1(-(x, y))
-1(I(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

O(0) → 0
+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
*(0, x) → 0
*(x, 0) → 0
*(O(x), y) → O(*(x, y))
*(I(x), y) → +(O(*(x, y)), y)
-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))

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 3 SCCs with 7 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(-(x, y), I(1))
-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(O(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

O(0) → 0
+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
*(0, x) → 0
*(x, 0) → 0
*(O(x), y) → O(*(x, y))
*(I(x), y) → +(O(*(x, y)), y)
-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))

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

(6) 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.

(7) Obligation:

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

-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(-(x, y), I(1))
-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(O(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))
O(0) → 0

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

(8) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.
Strictly oriented dependency pairs:

-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(-(x, y), I(1))
-1(O(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(O(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), O(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(I(x), I(y)) → -1(x, y)

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))
O(0) → 0

Used ordering: Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:
-^12 > 0 > -2 > 1 > O1 > I1

and weight map:

0=1
1=2
O_1=5
I_1=3
-_2=0
-^1_2=0

The variable weight is 1

(9) Obligation:

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

(10) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(11) YES

(12) Obligation:

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

+1(O(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(O(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(+(x, y), I(0))
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

O(0) → 0
+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
*(0, x) → 0
*(x, 0) → 0
*(O(x), y) → O(*(x, y))
*(I(x), y) → +(O(*(x, y)), y)
-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))

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

(13) 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.

(14) Obligation:

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

+1(O(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(O(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(+(x, y), I(0))
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
O(0) → 0

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

(15) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.
Strictly oriented dependency pairs:

+1(O(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(O(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), O(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(+(x, y), I(0))
+1(I(x), I(y)) → +1(x, y)

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
O(0) → 0

Used ordering: Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:
0 > +^12 > +2 > I1 > O1

and weight map:

0=2
O_1=1
I_1=3
+_2=0
+^1_2=0

The variable weight is 1

(16) Obligation:

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

(17) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(18) YES

(19) Obligation:

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

*1(I(x), y) → *1(x, y)
*1(O(x), y) → *1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

O(0) → 0
+(0, x) → x
+(x, 0) → x
+(O(x), O(y)) → O(+(x, y))
+(O(x), I(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), O(y)) → I(+(x, y))
+(I(x), I(y)) → O(+(+(x, y), I(0)))
*(0, x) → 0
*(x, 0) → 0
*(O(x), y) → O(*(x, y))
*(I(x), y) → +(O(*(x, y)), y)
-(x, 0) → x
-(0, x) → 0
-(O(x), O(y)) → O(-(x, y))
-(O(x), I(y)) → I(-(-(x, y), I(1)))
-(I(x), O(y)) → I(-(x, y))
-(I(x), I(y)) → O(-(x, y))

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

(20) 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.

(21) Obligation:

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

*1(I(x), y) → *1(x, y)
*1(O(x), y) → *1(x, y)

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

(22) 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:

  • *1(I(x), y) → *1(x, y)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

  • *1(O(x), y) → *1(x, y)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

(23) YES