(0) Obligation:
Relative term rewrite system:
The relative TRS consists of the following R rules:
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(0, y) → 0
minus(s(x), y) → if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) → 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) → s(minus(x, y))
gcd(0, y) → y
gcd(s(x), 0) → s(x)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → if_gcd(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(y, x), s(x))
The relative TRS consists of the following S rules:
rand(x) → rand(s(x))
rand(x) → x
(1) RelTRStoRelADPProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We upgrade the RelTRS problem to an equivalent Relative ADP Problem [IJCAR24].
(2) Obligation:
Relative ADP Problem with
absolute ADPs:
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → LE(x, y)
minus(0, y) → 0
minus(s(x), y) → IF_MINUS(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
minus(s(x), y) → if_minus(LE(s(x), y), s(x), y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) → 0
if_minus(false, s(x), y) → s(MINUS(x, y))
gcd(0, y) → y
gcd(s(x), 0) → s(x)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → IF_GCD(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → if_gcd(LE(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → GCD(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(MINUS(x, y), s(y))
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → GCD(minus(y, x), s(x))
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(MINUS(y, x), s(x))
and relative ADPs:
rand(x) → RAND(s(x))
rand(x) → x
(3) RelADPDepGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the relative dependency graph processor [IJCAR24].
The approximation of the Relative Dependency Graph contains:
3 SCCs with nodes from P_abs,
0 Lassos,
Result: This relative DT problem is equivalent to 3 subproblems.
(4) Complex Obligation (AND)
(5) Obligation:
Relative ADP Problem with
absolute ADPs:
minus(s(x), y) → if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
gcd(0, y) → y
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → if_gcd(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_minus(false, s(x), y) → s(minus(x, y))
le(s(x), 0) → false
gcd(s(x), 0) → s(x)
le(0, y) → true
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(y, x), s(x))
le(s(x), s(y)) → LE(x, y)
if_minus(true, s(x), y) → 0
minus(0, y) → 0
and relative ADPs:
rand(x) → rand(s(x))
rand(x) → x
(6) RelADPCleverAfsProof (SOUND transformation)
We use the first derelatifying processor [IJCAR24].
There are no annotations in relative ADPs, so the relative ADP problem can be transformed into a non-relative DP problem.
Furthermore, We use an argument filter [LPAR04].
Filtering:s_1 =
true =
gcd_2 =
LE_2 = 0
le_2 = 0, 1
0 =
minus_2 = 1
if_gcd_3 = 0
if_minus_3 = 0, 2
rand_1 =
false =
Found this filtering by looking at the following order that orders at least one DP strictly:Combined order from the following AFS and order.
LE(x1, x2) = LE(x2)
s(x1) = s(x1)
minus(x1, x2) = minus(x1)
if_minus(x1, x2, x3) = if_minus(x2)
le(x1, x2) = le
0 = 0
false = false
gcd(x1, x2) = gcd(x1, x2)
if_gcd(x1, x2, x3) = if_gcd(x2, x3)
true = true
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
[gcd2, ifgcd2] > [le, true] > [s1, minus1, ifminus1] > [0, false]
Status:
LE1: [1]
s1: [1]
minus1: [1]
ifminus1: [1]
le: multiset
0: multiset
false: multiset
gcd2: multiset
ifgcd2: multiset
true: multiset
(7) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
LE(s0(y)) → LE(y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
le → false0
gcd0(s0(x), 00) → s0(x)
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(00, y) → y
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
le → true0
rand0(x) → x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (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 rules of the TRS R:
le → false0
gcd0(s0(x), 00) → s0(x)
gcd0(00, y) → y
rand0(x) → x
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(00) = 0
POL(LE(x1)) = x1
POL(false0) = 0
POL(gcd0(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_gcd(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_minus(x1)) = x1
POL(le) = 2
POL(minus(x1)) = x1
POL(rand0(x1)) = 2 + x1
POL(s0(x1)) = x1
POL(true0) = 2
(9) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
LE(s0(y)) → LE(y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
le → true0
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(10) 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 rules of the TRS R:
le → true0
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(00) = 0
POL(LE(x1)) = x1
POL(gcd0(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_gcd(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_minus(x1)) = x1
POL(le) = 2
POL(minus(x1)) = x1
POL(rand0(x1)) = x1
POL(s0(x1)) = x1
POL(true0) = 1
(11) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
LE(s0(y)) → LE(y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(12) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
LE(s0(y)) → LE(y)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation:
POL( if_minus(x1) ) = 2x1 |
POL( if_gcd(x1, x2) ) = max{0, x1 + x2 - 1} |
POL( gcd0(x1, x2) ) = x1 + x2 |
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
(13) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(14) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.
(15) YES
(16) Obligation:
Relative ADP Problem with
absolute ADPs:
minus(s(x), y) → if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
le(s(x), 0) → false
gcd(s(x), 0) → s(x)
if_minus(false, s(x), y) → s(MINUS(x, y))
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(y, x), s(x))
if_minus(true, s(x), y) → 0
minus(0, y) → 0
gcd(0, y) → y
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → if_gcd(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
le(0, y) → true
minus(s(x), y) → IF_MINUS(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
and relative ADPs:
rand(x) → rand(s(x))
rand(x) → x
(17) RelADPCleverAfsProof (SOUND transformation)
We use the first derelatifying processor [IJCAR24].
There are no annotations in relative ADPs, so the relative ADP problem can be transformed into a non-relative DP problem.
Furthermore, We use an argument filter [LPAR04].
Filtering:MINUS_2 = 1
true =
gcd_2 =
if_gcd_3 = 0
IF_MINUS_3 = 0, 2
if_minus_3 = 0, 2
rand_1 =
false =
s_1 =
le_2 = 0, 1
0 =
minus_2 = 1
Found this filtering by looking at the following order that orders at least one DP strictly:Combined order from the following AFS and order.
IF_MINUS(x1, x2, x3) = x2
false = false
s(x1) = s(x1)
MINUS(x1, x2) = MINUS(x1)
le(x1, x2) = le
minus(x1, x2) = x1
if_minus(x1, x2, x3) = x2
0 = 0
gcd(x1, x2) = gcd(x1, x2)
if_gcd(x1, x2, x3) = if_gcd(x2, x3)
true = true
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
[gcd2, ifgcd2] > [s1, le, true] > [false, MINUS1] > 0
Status:
false: multiset
s1: [1]
MINUS1: multiset
le: multiset
0: multiset
gcd2: multiset
ifgcd2: multiset
true: multiset
(18) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
IF_MINUS(s0(x)) → MINUS(x)
MINUS(s0(x)) → IF_MINUS(s0(x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
le → false0
gcd0(s0(x), 00) → s0(x)
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(00, y) → y
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
le → true0
rand0(x) → x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(19) 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 rules of the TRS R:
le → false0
gcd0(s0(x), 00) → s0(x)
gcd0(00, y) → y
rand0(x) → x
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(00) = 0
POL(IF_MINUS(x1)) = 2·x1
POL(MINUS(x1)) = 2·x1
POL(false0) = 0
POL(gcd0(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_gcd(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_minus(x1)) = x1
POL(le) = 2
POL(minus(x1)) = x1
POL(rand0(x1)) = 2 + x1
POL(s0(x1)) = x1
POL(true0) = 2
(20) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
IF_MINUS(s0(x)) → MINUS(x)
MINUS(s0(x)) → IF_MINUS(s0(x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
le → true0
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(21) 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 rules of the TRS R:
le → true0
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(00) = 0
POL(IF_MINUS(x1)) = x1
POL(MINUS(x1)) = x1
POL(gcd0(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_gcd(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(if_minus(x1)) = x1
POL(le) = 2
POL(minus(x1)) = x1
POL(rand0(x1)) = x1
POL(s0(x1)) = x1
POL(true0) = 1
(22) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
IF_MINUS(s0(x)) → MINUS(x)
MINUS(s0(x)) → IF_MINUS(s0(x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(23) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
IF_MINUS(s0(x)) → MINUS(x)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
IF_MINUS(
x1) =
IF_MINUS(
x1)
s0(
x1) =
s0(
x1)
MINUS(
x1) =
MINUS(
x1)
minus(
x1) =
x1
if_minus(
x1) =
x1
le =
le
if_gcd(
x1,
x2) =
if_gcd
gcd0(
x1,
x2) =
gcd0
rand0(
x1) =
rand0
00 =
00
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
[IFMINUS1, MINUS1] > [s01, 00] > rand0
le > rand0
[ifgcd, gcd0] > [s01, 00] > rand0
Status:
IFMINUS1: multiset
s01: multiset
MINUS1: multiset
le: multiset
ifgcd: multiset
gcd0: multiset
rand0: multiset
00: multiset
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
(24) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
MINUS(s0(x)) → IF_MINUS(s0(x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le → le
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (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
(27) Obligation:
Relative ADP Problem with
absolute ADPs:
minus(s(x), y) → if_minus(le(s(x), y), s(x), y)
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → IF_GCD(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
le(s(x), 0) → false
gcd(s(x), 0) → s(x)
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(y, x), s(x))
if_minus(true, s(x), y) → 0
if_gcd(false, s(x), s(y)) → GCD(minus(y, x), s(x))
minus(0, y) → 0
gcd(0, y) → y
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → if_gcd(le(y, x), s(x), s(y))
if_gcd(true, s(x), s(y)) → GCD(minus(x, y), s(y))
if_minus(false, s(x), y) → s(minus(x, y))
le(0, y) → true
and relative ADPs:
rand(x) → rand(s(x))
rand(x) → x
(28) RelADPCleverAfsProof (SOUND transformation)
We use the first derelatifying processor [IJCAR24].
There are no annotations in relative ADPs, so the relative ADP problem can be transformed into a non-relative DP problem.
Furthermore, We use an argument filter [LPAR04].
Filtering:true =
IF_GCD_3 = 0
gcd_2 =
if_gcd_3 = 0
if_minus_3 = 0, 2
rand_1 =
false =
GCD_2 =
s_1 =
le_2 = 0
0 =
minus_2 = 1
Found this filtering by looking at the following order that orders at least one DP strictly:Combined order from the following AFS and order.
IF_GCD(x1, x2, x3) = IF_GCD(x2, x3)
false = false
s(x1) = s(x1)
GCD(x1, x2) = GCD(x1, x2)
minus(x1, x2) = x1
le(x1, x2) = le(x2)
true = true
if_minus(x1, x2, x3) = x2
0 = 0
gcd(x1, x2) = gcd(x1, x2)
if_gcd(x1, x2, x3) = if_gcd(x2, x3)
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
[IFGCD2, GCD2] > [false, s1, le1, 0] > [gcd2, ifgcd2] > true
Status:
IFGCD2: multiset
false: multiset
s1: [1]
GCD2: multiset
le1: multiset
true: multiset
0: multiset
gcd2: multiset
ifgcd2: multiset
(29) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(y), s0(x))
GCD0(s0(x), s0(y)) → IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y))
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(x), s0(y))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le(s0(y)) → le(y)
le(00) → false0
gcd0(s0(x), 00) → s0(x)
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(00, y) → y
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
le(y) → true0
rand0(x) → x
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(30) 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 rules of the TRS R:
gcd0(s0(x), 00) → s0(x)
gcd0(00, y) → y
rand0(x) → x
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(00) = 0
POL(GCD0(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(IF_GCD(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(false0) = 0
POL(gcd0(x1, x2)) = 2 + x1 + x2
POL(if_gcd(x1, x2)) = 2 + x1 + x2
POL(if_minus(x1)) = x1
POL(le(x1)) = x1
POL(minus(x1)) = x1
POL(rand0(x1)) = 2 + x1
POL(s0(x1)) = x1
POL(true0) = 0
(31) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(y), s0(x))
GCD0(s0(x), s0(y)) → IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y))
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(x), s0(y))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le(s0(y)) → le(y)
le(00) → false0
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
le(y) → true0
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(32) 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 rules of the TRS R:
le(00) → false0
le(y) → true0
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(00) = 0
POL(GCD0(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(IF_GCD(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(false0) = 1
POL(gcd0(x1, x2)) = 2 + x1 + x2
POL(if_gcd(x1, x2)) = 2 + x1 + x2
POL(if_minus(x1)) = x1
POL(le(x1)) = 2 + x1
POL(minus(x1)) = x1
POL(rand0(x1)) = x1
POL(s0(x1)) = x1
POL(true0) = 1
(33) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(y), s0(x))
GCD0(s0(x), s0(y)) → IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y))
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(x), s0(y))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le(s0(y)) → le(y)
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(34) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(y), s0(x))
IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y)) → GCD0(minus(x), s0(y))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [NEGPOLO,POLO] with Interpretation:
POL( if_gcd(x1, x2) ) = max{0, 2x1 + x2 - 2} |
POL( gcd0(x1, x2) ) = max{0, 2x1 + x2 - 1} |
POL( IF_GCD(x1, x2) ) = max{0, 2x1 + 2x2 - 2} |
POL( GCD0(x1, x2) ) = max{0, 2x1 + 2x2 - 2} |
The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le(s0(y)) → le(y)
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
(35) Obligation:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
GCD0(s0(x), s0(y)) → IF_GCD(s0(x), s0(y))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
minus(s0(x)) → if_minus(s0(x))
le(s0(y)) → le(y)
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(x), s0(y))
rand0(x) → rand0(s0(x))
if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y)) → gcd0(minus(y), s0(x))
if_minus(s0(x)) → 00
minus(00) → 00
gcd0(s0(x), s0(y)) → if_gcd(s0(x), s0(y))
if_minus(s0(x)) → s0(minus(x))
Q is empty.
We have to consider all (P,Q,R)-chains.
(36) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.
(37) TRUE