Certification Problem

Input (COPS 614)

We consider the TRS containing the following rules:

+(0,y) → y (1)
+(s(x),y) → s(+(x,y)) (2)
+(p(x),y) → +(x,p(y)) (3)
p(s(x)) → s(p(x)) (4)
s(p(x)) → p(s(x)) (5)
p(s(0)) → 0 (6)

The underlying signature is as follows:

{+/2, 0/0, s/1, p/1}

Property / Task

Prove or disprove confluence.

Answer / Result

No.

Proof (by ACP @ CoCo 2020)

1 Non-Joinable Fork

The system is not confluent due to the following forking derivations.

t0 = +(s(p(0)),c_1)
→ s(+(p(0),c_1))
→ s(+(0,p(c_1)))
→ s(p(c_1))
→ p(s(c_1))
= t4

t0 = +(s(p(0)),c_1)
→ +(p(s(0)),c_1)
→ +(0,c_1)
→ c_1
= t3

The two resulting terms cannot be joined for the following reason: