YES Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /home/cern_httpd/provide/research/cycsrs/tpdb/TPDB-d9b80194f163/SRS_Standard/Secret_07_SRS/dj.srs

(0) Obligation:

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

1(0(x)) → 0(0(0(1(x))))
0(1(x)) → 1(x)
1(1(x)) → 0(0(0(0(x))))
0(0(x)) → 0(x)

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(0(x1)) = x1   
POL(1(x1)) = 1 + x1   
With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

1(1(x)) → 0(0(0(0(x))))


(2) Obligation:

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

1(0(x)) → 0(0(0(1(x))))
0(1(x)) → 1(x)
0(0(x)) → 0(x)

Q is empty.

(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:

11(0(x)) → 01(0(0(1(x))))
11(0(x)) → 01(0(1(x)))
11(0(x)) → 01(1(x))
11(0(x)) → 11(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

1(0(x)) → 0(0(0(1(x))))
0(1(x)) → 1(x)
0(0(x)) → 0(x)

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

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 3 less nodes.

(6) Obligation:

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

11(0(x)) → 11(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

1(0(x)) → 0(0(0(1(x))))
0(1(x)) → 1(x)
0(0(x)) → 0(x)

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

(7) 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.

(8) Obligation:

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

11(0(x)) → 11(x)

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

(9) 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:

  • 11(0(x)) → 11(x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(10) YES