We consider the system lambda_prod. Alphabet: app : [] --> arrab -> a -> b lam : [] --> (a -> b) -> arrab pair : [] --> a -> b -> prodab pia : [] --> prodab -> a pib : [] --> prodab -> b Rules: app (lam (/\x.f x)) y => f y lam (/\x.app y x) => y pia (pair x y) => x pib (pair x y) => y pair (pia x) (pib x) => x Using the transformations described in [Kop11], this system can be brought in a form without leading free variables in the left-hand side, and where the left-hand side of a variable is always a functional term or application headed by a functional term. We now transform the resulting AFS into an AFSM by replacing all free variables by meta-variables (with arity 0). This leads to the following AFSM: Alphabet: app : [arrab * a] --> b lam : [a -> b] --> arrab pair : [a * b] --> prodab pia : [prodab] --> a pib : [prodab] --> b ~AP1 : [a -> b * a] --> b Rules: app(lam(/\x.~AP1(F, x)), X) => ~AP1(F, X) lam(/\x.app(X, x)) => X pia(pair(X, Y)) => X pib(pair(X, Y)) => Y pair(pia(X), pib(X)) => X app(lam(/\x.app(X, x)), Y) => app(X, Y) ~AP1(F, X) => F X Symbol ~AP1 is an encoding for application that is only used in innocuous ways. We can simplify the program (without losing non-termination) by removing it. Additionally, we can remove some (now-)redundant rules. This gives: Alphabet: app : [arrab * a] --> b lam : [a -> b] --> arrab pair : [a * b] --> prodab pia : [prodab] --> a pib : [prodab] --> b Rules: app(lam(/\x.X(x)), Y) => X(Y) lam(/\x.app(X, x)) => X pia(pair(X, Y)) => X pib(pair(X, Y)) => Y pair(pia(X), pib(X)) => X We observe that the rules contain a first-order subset: pia(pair(X, Y)) => X pib(pair(X, Y)) => Y pair(pia(X), pib(X)) => X Moreover, the system is finitely branching. Thus, by [Kop12, Thm. 7.55], we may omit all first-order dependency pairs from the dependency pair problem (DP(R), R) if this first-order part is Ce-terminating when seen as a many-sorted first-order TRS. According to mutermprover, this system is indeed Ce-terminating: || || Problem 1: || || (VAR %X %Y) || (RULES || pair(pia(%X),pib(%X)) -> %X || pia(pair(%X,%Y)) -> %X || pib(pair(%X,%Y)) -> %Y || ~PAIR(%X,%Y) -> %X || ~PAIR(%X,%Y) -> %Y || ) || || Problem 1: || || Dependency Pairs Processor: || -> Pairs: || Empty || -> Rules: || pair(pia(%X),pib(%X)) -> %X || pia(pair(%X,%Y)) -> %X || pib(pair(%X,%Y)) -> %Y || ~PAIR(%X,%Y) -> %X || ~PAIR(%X,%Y) -> %Y || || Problem 1: || || SCC Processor: || -> Pairs: || Empty || -> Rules: || pair(pia(%X),pib(%X)) -> %X || pia(pair(%X,%Y)) -> %X || pib(pair(%X,%Y)) -> %Y || ~PAIR(%X,%Y) -> %X || ~PAIR(%X,%Y) -> %Y || ->Strongly Connected Components: || There is no strongly connected component || || The problem is finite. || We use the dependency pair framework as described in [Kop12, Ch. 6/7], with static dependency pairs (see [KusIsoSakBla09] and the adaptation for AFSMs and accessible arguments in [FuhKop19]). We thus obtain the following dependency pair problem (P_0, R_0, computable, all): Dependency Pairs P_0: Rules R_0: app(lam(/\x.X(x)), Y) => X(Y) lam(/\x.app(X, x)) => X pia(pair(X, Y)) => X pib(pair(X, Y)) => Y pair(pia(X), pib(X)) => X Thus, the original system is terminating if (P_0, R_0, computable, all) is finite. We consider the dependency pair problem (P_0, R_0, computable, all). We place the elements of P in a dependency graph approximation G (see e.g. [Kop12, Thm. 7.27, 7.29], as follows: This graph has no strongly connected components. By [Kop12, Thm. 7.31], this implies finiteness of the dependency pair problem. As all dependency pair problems were succesfully simplified with sound (and complete) processors until nothing remained, we conclude termination. +++ Citations +++ [FuhKop19] C. Fuhs, and C. Kop. A static higher-order dependency pair framework. In Proceedings of ESOP 2019, 2019. [Kop11] C. Kop. Simplifying Algebraic Functional Systems. In Proceedings of CAI 2011, volume 6742 of LNCS. 201--215, Springer, 2011. [Kop12] C. Kop. Higher Order Termination. PhD Thesis, 2012. [KusIsoSakBla09] K. Kusakari, Y. Isogai, M. Sakai, and F. Blanqui. Static Dependency Pair Method Based On Strong Computability for Higher-Order Rewrite Systems. In volume 92(10) of IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems. 2007--2015, 2009.