Skip to main content

Automated Proofs of Unique Normal Forms w.r.t. Conversion for Term Rewriting Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11715))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The notion of normal forms is ubiquitous in various equivalent transformations. Confluence (CR), one of the central properties of term rewriting systems (TRSs), concerns uniqueness of normal forms. Yet another such property, which is weaker than confluence, is the property of unique normal forms w.r.t. conversion (UNC). Recently, automated confluence proof of TRSs has caught attentions; some powerful confluence tools integrating multiple methods for (dis)proving the CR property of TRSs have been developed. In contrast, there have been little efforts on (dis)proving the UNC property automatically yet. In this paper, we report on a UNC prover combining several methods for (dis)proving the UNC property. We present an equivalent transformation of TRSs preserving UNC, as well as some new criteria for (dis)proving UNC.

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 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    The uniqueness of normal forms w.r.t. conversion is also often abbreviated as UN in the literature; here, we prefer UNC to distinguish it from a similar but different notion of unique normal forms w.r.t. reduction (UNR), following the convention employed in CoCo (Confluence Competition).

  2. 2.

    http://project-coco.uibk.ac.at/.

  3. 3.

    Cops can be accessed from http://cops.uibk.ac.at/, which consists of 1137 problems at the time of experiment.

  4. 4.

    This was obtained by a query ‘trs !confluent !terminating’ in Cops at the time of experiment.

  5. 5.

    The recent version of CSI had been extended with some other techniques.

References

  1. Aoto, T., Toyama, Y.: Top-down labelling and modularity of term rewriting systems. Research Report IS-RR-96-0023F, School of Information Science, JAIST (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aoto, T., Toyama, Y.: On composable properties of term rewriting systems. In: Hanus, M., Heering, J., Meinke, K. (eds.) ALP/HOA -1997. LNCS, vol. 1298, pp. 114–128. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0027006

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Aoto, T., Yoshida, J., Toyama, Y.: Proving confluence of term rewriting systems automatically. In: Treinen, R. (ed.) RTA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5595, pp. 93–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02348-4_7

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Bergstra, J.A., Klop, J.W.: Conditional rewrite rules: confluence and termination. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 32, 323–362 (1986)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Dauchet, M., Heuillard, T., Lescanne, P., Tison, S.: Decidability of the confluence of finite ground term rewrite systems and of other related term rewrite systems. Inf. Comput. 88, 187–201 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Gramlich, B.: Modularity in term rewriting revisited. Theor. Comput. Sci. 464, 3–19 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Huet, G.: Confluent reductions: abstract properties and applications to term rewriting systems. J. ACM 27(4), 797–821 (1980)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Jaffar, J.: Efficient unification over infinite terms. New Gener. Comput. 2, 207–219 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kahrs, S., Smith, C.: Non-\(\omega \)-overlapping TRSs are UN. In: Proceedings of 1st FSCD. LIPIcs, vol. 52, pp. 22:1–22:17. Schloss Dagstuhl (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Klein, D., Hirokawa, N.: Confluence of non-left-linear TRSs via relative termination. In: Bjørner, N., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7180, pp. 258–273. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28717-6_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Klop, J.: Combinatory Reduction Systems, Mathematical Centre Tracts, vol. 127. CWI, Amsterdam (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Klop, J.W., de Vrijer, R.: Extended term rewriting systems. In: Kaplan, S., Okada, M. (eds.) CTRS 1990. LNCS, vol. 516, pp. 26–50. Springer, Heidelberg (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-54317-1_79

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Nagele, J., Felgenhauer, B., Middeldorp, A.: CSI: new evidence – a progress report. In: de Moura, L. (ed.) CADE 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10395, pp. 385–397. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63046-5_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. O’Donnell, M.J. (ed.): Computing in Systems Described by Equations. LNCS, vol. 58. Springer, Heidelberg (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-08531-9

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. van Oostrom, V.: Developing developments. Theor. Comput. Sci. 175(1), 159–181 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Radcliffe, N.R., Moreas, L.F.T., Verma, R.M.: Uniqueness of normal forms for shallow term rewrite systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 18(2), 17:1–17:20 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Rapp, F., Middeldorp, A.: Automating the first-order theory of rewriting for left-linear right-ground rewrite systems. In: Proceedings of 1st FSCD. LIPIcs, vol. 52, pp. 36:1–36:17. Schloss Dagstuhl (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Toyama, Y.: Commutativity of term rewriting systems. In: Fuchi, K., Kott, L. (eds.) Programming of Future Generation Computers II, North-Holland, pp. 393–407 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Toyama, Y.: Confluent term rewriting systems. In: Giesl, J. (ed.) RTA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3467, p. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32033-3_1. Slides at http://www.nue.ie.niigata-u.ac.jp/toyama/user/toyama/slides/toyama-RTA05.pdf

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Toyama, Y., Oyamaguchi, M.: Conditional linearization of non-duplicating term rewriting systems. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. E84-D(4), 439–447 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  22. de Vrijer, R.: Conditional linearization. Indagationes Math. 10(1), 145–159 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to the anonymous reviewers of the previous versions of the paper. This work is partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI No. 18K11158.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takahito Aoto .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Aoto, T., Toyama, Y. (2019). Automated Proofs of Unique Normal Forms w.r.t. Conversion for Term Rewriting Systems. In: Herzig, A., Popescu, A. (eds) Frontiers of Combining Systems. FroCoS 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11715. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29007-8_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29007-8_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29006-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29007-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics