### Refine

#### Keywords

- Term rewriting systems (2)
- combined systems with sha (2)
- confluence (2)
- disjoint union (2)
- innermost termination (2)
- modularity (2)
- termination (2)
- weak termination (2)

We investigate restricted termination and confluence properties of term rewritADing systems, in particular weak termination and innermost termination, and theirinterrelation. New criteria are provided which are sufficient for the equivalenceof innermost / weak termination and uniform termination of term rewriting sysADtems. These criteria provide interesting possibilities to infer completeness, i.e.termination plus confluence, from restricted termination and confluence properADties.Using these basic results we are also able to prove some new results aboutmodular termination of rewriting. In particular, we show that termination ismodular for some classes of innermost terminating and locally confluent termrewriting systems, namely for nonADoverlapping and even for overlay systems. Asan easy consequence this latter result also entails a simplified proof of the factthat completeness is a decomposable property of soADcalled constructor systems.Furthermore we show how to obtain similar results for even more general cases of(nonADdisjoint) combined systems with shared constructors and of certain hierarADchical combinations of systems with constructors. Interestingly, these modularityresults are obtained by means of a proof technique which itself constitutes a modADular approach.

We provide an overview of UNICOM, an inductive theorem prover for equational logic which isbased on refined rewriting and completion techniques. The architecture of the system as well as itsfunctionality are described. Moreover, an insight into the most important aspects of the internalproof process is provided. This knowledge about how the central inductive proof componentof the system essentially works is crucial for human users who want to solve non-trivial prooftasks with UNICOM and thoroughly analyse potential failures. The presentation is focussedon practical aspects of understanding and using UNICOM. A brief but complete description ofthe command interface, an installation guide, an example session, a detailed extended exampleillustrating various special features and a collection of successfully handled examples are alsoincluded.

We consider the problem of verifying confluence and termination of conditionalterm rewriting systems (TRSs). For unconditional TRSs the critical pair lemmaholds which enables a finite test for confluence of (finite) terminating systems.And for ensuring termination of unconditional TRSs a couple of methods forconstructing appropiate well-founded term orderings are known. If however ter-mination is not guaranteed then proving confluence is much more difficult. Re-cently we have obtained some interesting results for unconditional TRSs whichprovide sufficient criteria for termination plus confluence in terms of restrictedtermination and confluence properties. In particular, we have shown that anyinnermost terminating and locally confluent overlay system is complete, i.e. ter-minating and confluent. Here we generalize our approach to the conditional caseand show how to solve the additional complications due to the presence of con-ditions in the rules. Our main result can be stated as follows: Any conditionalTRS which is an innermost terminating semantical overlay system such that all(conditional) critical pairs are joinable is complete.

We present a new criterion for confluence of (possibly) non-terminating left-linear term rewriting systems. The criterion is based on certain strong joinabil-ity properties of parallel critical pairs . We show how this criterion relates toother well-known results, consider some special cases and discuss some possibleextensions.

The well-known and powerful proof principle by well-founded induction says that for verifying \(\forall x : P (x)\) for some property \(P\) it suffices to show \(\forall x : [[\forall y < x :P (y)] \Rightarrow P (x)] \) , provided \(<\) is a well-founded partial ordering on the domainof interest. Here we investigate a more general formulation of this proof principlewhich allows for a kind of parameterized partial orderings \(<_x\) which naturallyarises in some cases. More precisely, we develop conditions under which theparameterized proof principle \(\forall x : [[\forall y <_x x : P (y)] \Rightarrow P (x)]\) is sound in thesense that \(\forall x : [[\forall y <_x x : P (y)] \Rightarrow P (x)] \Rightarrow \forall x : P (x)\) holds, and givecounterexamples demonstrating that these conditions are indeed essential.