YES

The TRS could be proven terminating. The proof took 258 ms.

The following DP Processors were used


Problem 1 was processed with processor SubtermCriterion (5ms).

Problem 1: SubtermCriterion



Dependency Pair Problem

Dependency Pairs

dx#(plus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)dx#(exp(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)
dx#(minus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)dx#(exp(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)
dx#(plus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(times(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)
dx#(minus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(times(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)
dx#(div(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(ln(ALPHA)) → dx#(ALPHA)
dx#(neg(ALPHA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(div(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)

Rewrite Rules

dx(X) → onedx(a) → zero
dx(plus(ALPHA, BETA)) → plus(dx(ALPHA), dx(BETA))dx(times(ALPHA, BETA)) → plus(times(BETA, dx(ALPHA)), times(ALPHA, dx(BETA)))
dx(minus(ALPHA, BETA)) → minus(dx(ALPHA), dx(BETA))dx(neg(ALPHA)) → neg(dx(ALPHA))
dx(div(ALPHA, BETA)) → minus(div(dx(ALPHA), BETA), times(ALPHA, div(dx(BETA), exp(BETA, two))))dx(ln(ALPHA)) → div(dx(ALPHA), ALPHA)
dx(exp(ALPHA, BETA)) → plus(times(BETA, times(exp(ALPHA, minus(BETA, one)), dx(ALPHA))), times(exp(ALPHA, BETA), times(ln(ALPHA), dx(BETA))))

Original Signature

Termination of terms over the following signature is verified: plus, neg, two, exp, ln, minus, dx, times, one, a, div, zero

Strategy


Projection

The following projection was used:

Thus, the following dependency pairs are removed:

dx#(exp(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(plus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)
dx#(exp(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)dx#(minus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)
dx#(times(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)dx#(plus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)
dx#(minus(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(times(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)
dx#(ln(ALPHA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(div(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(ALPHA)
dx#(neg(ALPHA)) → dx#(ALPHA)dx#(div(ALPHA, BETA)) → dx#(BETA)