Skip to main content

Orderings for Innermost Termination

  • Conference paper
Term Rewriting and Applications (RTA 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 3467))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper shows that the suitable orderings for proving innermost termination are characterized by the innermost parallel monotonicity, IP-monotonicity for short. This property may lead to several innermost-specific orderings. Here, an IP-monotonic version of the Recursive Path Ordering is presented. This variant can be used (directly or as ingredient of the Dependency Pairs method) for proving innermost termination of non-terminating term rewrite systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arts, T., Giesl, J.: Termination of term rewriting using dependency pairs. Theoretical Computer Science 236(1-2), 133–178 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ben-Cherifa, A., Lescanne, P.: Termination of rewriting systems by polynomial interpretations and its implementation. Science of Computer Programming 9, 137–160 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Borralleras, C.: Ordering-based methods for proving termination automatically. PhD thesis, Dpto. LSI, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, España (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Borralleras, C., Ferreira, M., Rubio, A.: Complete monotonic semantic path orderings. In: McAllester, D. (ed.) CADE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1831, Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Dershowitz, N.: Orderings for term rewriting systems. Theoretical Computer Science 17(3), 279–301 (1982)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Fernández, M.L.: Relaxing monotonicity for innermost termination. Information Processing Letters 93(3), 117–123 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Fissore, O., Gnaedig, I., Kirchner, H.: Induction for innermost and outermost ground termination. Technical Report A01-R-178, LORIA, Nancy, France (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P., Falke, S.: Improving dependency pairs. In: Y. Vardi, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2003. LNCS, vol. 2850, pp. 165–179. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Gramlich, B.: On proving termination by innermost termination. In: Ganzinger, H. (ed.) RTA 1996. LNCS, vol. 1103, pp. 93–107. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hirokawa, N., Middeldorp, A.: Polynomial interpretations with negative coefficients. In: Buchberger, B., Campbell, J. (eds.) AISC 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3249, pp. 185–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Kamin, S., Levy, J.J.: Two generalizations of the recursive path ordering. Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kusakari, K., Nakamura, M., Toyama, Y.: Argument filtering transformation. In: Nadathur, G. (ed.) PPDP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1702, pp. 47–61. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee, C.S., Jones, N.D., Ben-Amram, A.M.: The size-change principle for program termination. In: Proc. POPL, pp. 81–92 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lucas, S.: Polynomials for proving termination of context-sensitive rewriting. In: Walukiewicz, I. (ed.) FOSSACS 2004. LNCS, vol. 2987, pp. 318–332. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Manna, Z., Ness, S.: On the termination of Markov algorithms. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on System Science, pp. 789–792 (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  17. O’Donnell, M.J.: Computing in Systems Described by Equations. LNCS, vol. 58. Springer, Heidelberg (1977)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Krishna Rao, M.R.K.: Some characteristic of strong innermost normalization. Theoretical Computer Science (239), 141–164 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Steinbach, J., Xi, H.: Freezing - termination proofs for classical, context-sensitive and innermost rewriting. Technical report, Institut für Informatik, T.U. München, Germany (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Thiemann, R., Giesl, J.: Size-change termination for term rewriting. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) RTA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2706, pp. 264–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Toyama, Y.: Counterexamples to termination for the direct sum of term rewriting systems. Information Processing Letters 25, 141–143 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Fernández, ML., Godoy, G., Rubio, A. (2005). Orderings for Innermost Termination. In: Giesl, J. (eds) Term Rewriting and Applications. RTA 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3467. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32033-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32033-3_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-25596-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32033-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics