MAYBE

The TRS could not be proven terminating. The proof attempt took 2555 ms.

The following DP Processors were used


Problem 1 was processed with processor DependencyGraph (0ms).
 | – Problem 2 remains open; application of the following processors failed [SubtermCriterion (1ms), DependencyGraph (4ms), PolynomialLinearRange4iUR (354ms), DependencyGraph (1ms), PolynomialLinearRange8NegiUR (1476ms), DependencyGraph (1ms), ReductionPairSAT (188ms), DependencyGraph (3ms), SizeChangePrinciple (209ms)].

The following open problems remain:



Open Dependency Pair Problem 2

Dependency Pairs

length1#(X)length#(activate(X))length#(n__cons(X, Y))length1#(activate(Y))

Rewrite Rules

from(X)cons(X, n__from(s(X)))length(n__nil)0
length(n__cons(X, Y))s(length1(activate(Y)))length1(X)length(activate(X))
from(X)n__from(X)niln__nil
cons(X1, X2)n__cons(X1, X2)activate(n__from(X))from(X)
activate(n__nil)nilactivate(n__cons(X1, X2))cons(X1, X2)
activate(X)X

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: activate, n__cons, 0, n__from, s, length, length1, n__nil, from, nil, cons


Problem 1: DependencyGraph



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

activate#(n__nil)nil#from#(X)cons#(X, n__from(s(X)))
length#(n__cons(X, Y))length1#(activate(Y))length1#(X)length#(activate(X))
activate#(n__from(X))from#(X)length#(n__cons(X, Y))activate#(Y)
length1#(X)activate#(X)activate#(n__cons(X1, X2))cons#(X1, X2)

Rewrite Rules

from(X)cons(X, n__from(s(X)))length(n__nil)0
length(n__cons(X, Y))s(length1(activate(Y)))length1(X)length(activate(X))
from(X)n__from(X)niln__nil
cons(X1, X2)n__cons(X1, X2)activate(n__from(X))from(X)
activate(n__nil)nilactivate(n__cons(X1, X2))cons(X1, X2)
activate(X)X

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: activate, n__cons, 0, s, n__from, length, from, n__nil, length1, cons, nil

Strategy


The following SCCs where found

length#(n__cons(X, Y)) → length1#(activate(Y))length1#(X) → length#(activate(X))