YES Termination w.r.t. Q proof of Applicative_first_order_05_3.40.ari

Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳4 AND
    ↳5 QDP
        ↳6 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 UsableRulesReductionPairsProof (⇔, 17 ms)
        ↳9 QDP
        ↳10 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳11 TRUE
    ↳12 QDP
        ↳13 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳14 QDP
        ↳15 ATransformationProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳16 QDP
        ↳17 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳18 YES
    ↳19 QDP
        ↳20 QDPOrderProof (⇔, 12 ms)
        ↳21 QDP
        ↳22 PisEmptyProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳23 YES
    ↳24 QDP
        ↳25 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳26 YES

(0) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(2) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(minus, x), y)
APP(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(minus, x)
APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y))
APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(quot, app(app(minus, x), y))
APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(minus, x), y)
APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(minus, x)
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(app(plus, x), y)
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(plus, x)
APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z))))
APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z))))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(cons, app(f, x))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(filter2, app(f, x))
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(cons, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 4 SCCs with 18 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(app(plus, x), y)
APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(6) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(7) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
APP(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → APP(app(plus, x), y)
APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(minus, x), 0) → x

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(8) UsableRulesReductionPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

First, we A-transformed [FROCOS05] the QDP-Problem. Then we obtain the following A-transformed DP problem.
The pairs P are:

plus1(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus1(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus1(s(x), y) → plus1(x, y)
plus1(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus1(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))

and the Q and R are:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
plus(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x

Q is empty.

By using the usable rules with reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with a polynomial ordering [POLO], all dependency pairs and the corresponding usable rules [FROCOS05] can be oriented non-strictly. All non-usable rules are removed, and those dependency pairs and usable rules that have been oriented strictly or contain non-usable symbols in their left-hand side are removed as well.

The following dependency pairs can be deleted:

plus1(s(x), y) → plus1(x, y)
The following rules are removed from R:

app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(0) = 2   
POL(minus(x1, x2)) = 2·x1 + 2·x2   
POL(plus(x1, x2)) = 2 + x1 + x2   
POL(plus1(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(s(x1)) = 2 + x1   

(9) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

plus1(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus1(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus1(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus1(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
plus(minus(x, s(0)), minus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus(minus(y, s(s(z))), minus(x, s(0)))
plus(plus(x, s(0)), plus(y, s(s(z)))) → plus(plus(y, s(s(z))), plus(x, s(0)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(10) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

(11) TRUE

(12) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(minus, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(13) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(14) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(minus, x), y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(15) ATransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We have applied the A-Transformation [FROCOS05] to get from an applicative problem to a standard problem.

(16) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(17) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

  • minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(18) YES

(19) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(20) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. Here, we combined the reduction pair processor with the A-transformation [FROCOS05] which results in the following intermediate Q-DP Problem.
The a-transformed P is

quot1(s(x), s(y)) → quot1(minus(x, y), s(y))

The a-transformed usable rules are

minus(x, 0) → x
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
quot1(x1, x2)  =  x1
s(x1)  =  s(x1)
minus(x1, x2)  =  x1

Knuth-Bendix order [KBO] with precedence:
trivial

and weight map:

s_1=1
dummyConstant=1

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)

(21) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(22) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(23) YES

(24) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(minus, x), 0) → x
app(app(minus, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(minus, x), y)
app(app(quot, 0), app(s, y)) → 0
app(app(quot, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(quot, app(app(minus, x), y)), app(s, y)))
app(app(plus, 0), y) → y
app(app(plus, app(s, x)), y) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
app(app(plus, app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(minus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(minus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(plus, app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0))), app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))) → app(app(plus, app(app(plus, y), app(s, app(s, z)))), app(app(plus, x), app(s, 0)))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → app(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → app(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → app(app(filter, f), xs)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(25) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

  • APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2

  • APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2

  • APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2

(26) YES