Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpMCU-kE/ma96.trs

Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be proven:

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

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.

Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → AND(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
REN(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → IF(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → AND(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, S)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)
REN(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(X, Xp)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T))
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → AND(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(S, Sp)
REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, T)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → AND(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
REN(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → IF(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → AND(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, S)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)
REN(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(X, Xp)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T))
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → AND(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(S, Sp)
REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, T)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 2 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(X, Xp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(S, Sp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → EQ(X, Xp)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(S, Sp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(apply(x₁, x₂)) = x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(lambda(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x_1 + x_2
POL(EQ(x₁, x₂)) = (1/4)x_2
POL(var(x₁)) = x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/4.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(S, Sp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → EQ(S, Sp)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = (2)x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(apply(x₁, x₂)) = 1/4 + (4)x_1 + (2)x_2
POL(EQ(x₁, x₂)) = (1/4)x_1
POL(var(x₁)) = (4)x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/16.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(T, Tp)
EQ(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 1/4 + x_1 + x_2
POL(EQ(x₁, x₂)) = (1/4)x_2
POL(var(x₁)) = (4)x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/16.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

EQ(var(L), var(Lp)) → EQ(L, Lp)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(EQ(x₁, x₂)) = (1/2)x_1
POL(var(x₁)) = 1/2 + (4)x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/4.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

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

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, S)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T))
REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, T)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, S)
REN(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → REN(X, Y, T)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T))

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(if(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 0
POL(eq(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(apply(x₁, x₂)) = 4 + x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(lambda(x₁, x₂)) = x_2
POL(true) = 0
POL(ren(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x_3
POL(false) = 0
POL(REN(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (4)x_3
POL(var(x₁)) = 0
POL(and(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(nil) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 16.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)
REN(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → REN(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(if(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 0
POL(eq(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(apply(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(lambda(x₁, x₂)) = 1/2 + (4)x_1 + x_2
POL(true) = 0
POL(ren(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x_3
POL(false) = 0
POL(REN(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (1/4)x_1 + (1/4)x_3
POL(var(x₁)) = 0
POL(and(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(nil) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/8.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

and(false, false) → false
and(true, false) → false
and(false, true) → false
and(true, true) → true
eq(nil, nil) → true
eq(cons(T, L), nil) → false
eq(nil, cons(T, L)) → false
eq(cons(T, L), cons(Tp, Lp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(L, Lp))
eq(var(L), var(Lp)) → eq(L, Lp)
eq(var(L), apply(T, S)) → false
eq(var(L), lambda(X, T)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), var(L)) → false
eq(apply(T, S), apply(Tp, Sp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(S, Sp))
eq(apply(T, S), lambda(X, Tp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), var(L)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), apply(Tp, Sp)) → false
eq(lambda(X, T), lambda(Xp, Tp)) → and(eq(T, Tp), eq(X, Xp))
if(true, var(K), var(L)) → var(K)
if(false, var(K), var(L)) → var(L)
ren(var(L), var(K), var(Lp)) → if(eq(L, Lp), var(K), var(Lp))
ren(X, Y, apply(T, S)) → apply(ren(X, Y, T), ren(X, Y, S))
ren(X, Y, lambda(Z, T)) → lambda(var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), ren(X, Y, ren(Z, var(cons(X, cons(Y, cons(lambda(Z, T), nil)))), T)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.