YES Termination w.r.t. Q proof of Applicative_first_order_05_30.ari

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

0 QTRS
↳1 Overlay + Local Confluence (⇔, 0 ms)
↳2 QTRS
↳3 DependencyPairsProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳4 QDP
↳5 DependencyGraphProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳6 AND
    ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳9 QDP
        ↳10 ATransformationProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳11 QDP
        ↳12 QReductionProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳13 QDP
        ↳14 QDPOrderProof (⇔, 55 ms)
        ↳15 QDP
        ↳16 PisEmptyProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳17 YES
    ↳18 QDP
        ↳19 UsableRulesProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳20 QDP
        ↳21 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔, 0 ms)
        ↳22 YES

(0) Obligation:

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

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → app(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
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) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost.

(2) Obligation:

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

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → app(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
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)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x0)), x1)), x2)), x3)
app(app(map, x0), nil)
app(app(map, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), x0), x1), x2)
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), x0), x1), x2)

(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(4) Obligation:

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

APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(:, app(app(:, x), z))
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, x), z)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(:, x)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z))
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(:, app(app(:, x), y))
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, x), y)
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(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → app(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
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)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x0)), x1)), x2)), x3)
app(app(map, x0), nil)
app(app(map, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), x0), x1), x2)
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), x0), x1), x2)

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

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 14 less nodes.

(6) Complex Obligation (AND)

(7) Obligation:

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

APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, x), z)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → app(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
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)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x0)), x1)), x2)), x3)
app(app(map, x0), nil)
app(app(map, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), x0), x1), x2)
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), x0), x1), x2)

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

(8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(9) Obligation:

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

APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, x), z)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)
APP(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → APP(app(:, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → app(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x0)), x1)), x2)), x3)
app(app(map, x0), nil)
app(app(map, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), x0), x1), x2)
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), x0), x1), x2)

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

(10) ATransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(11) Obligation:

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

:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(:(x, y), z), u)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, y), z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)
map(x0, nil)
map(x0, cons(x1, x2))
filter(x0, nil)
filter(x0, cons(x1, x2))
filter2(true, x0, x1, x2)
filter2(false, x0, x1, x2)

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

(12) QReductionProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.[THIEMANN].

map(x0, nil)
map(x0, cons(x1, x2))
filter(x0, nil)
filter(x0, cons(x1, x2))
filter2(true, x0, x1, x2)
filter2(false, x0, x1, x2)

(13) Obligation:

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

:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(:(x, y), z), u)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, y), z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)

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

(14) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(:(x, y), z), u)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, y), z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, y)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
:1(x1, x2)  =  :1(x1)
:(x1, x2)  =  :(x1, x2)
C  =  C

Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
:2 > [:11, C]

Status:
:11: multiset
:2: [1,2]
C: multiset


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

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

(15) Obligation:

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

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)

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

(16) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(17) YES

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x)), y)), z)), u) → app(app(:, app(app(:, x), z)), app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, x), y)), z)), u))
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)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x0)), x1)), x2)), x3)
app(app(map, x0), nil)
app(app(map, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), x0), x1), x2)
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), x0), x1), x2)

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

(19) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [LPAR04] we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

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

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, app(app(:, C), x0)), x1)), x2)), x3)
app(app(map, x0), nil)
app(app(map, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(app(filter2, true), x0), x1), x2)
app(app(app(app(filter2, false), x0), x1), x2)

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

(21) 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(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

(22) YES