Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpX7UaMD/Ex6_15_AEL02

Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could not be shown:

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

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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:

ACTIVATE(n__sel(X1, X2)) → SEL(X1, X2)
UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → FCONS(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__first(X1, X2)) → FIRST(X1, X2)
UNQUOTE(01) → 0¹
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → UNQUOTE(X)
FIRST(0, Z) → NIL
FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST1(X, activate(Z))
QUOTE1(n__first(X, Z)) → FIRST1(activate(X), activate(Z))
FROM(X) → S(X)
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE(activate(X))
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
UNQUOTE(s1(X)) → UNQUOTE(X)
SEL1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
ACTIVATE(n__0) → 0¹
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → CONS(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → SEL1(activate(X), activate(Z))
ACTIVATE(n__cons(X1, X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → FROM(X)
UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → UNQUOTE1(Z)
SEL1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL1(X, activate(Z))
SEL1(0, cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE(X)
QUOTE1(n__first(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE1(activate(Z))
QUOTE(n__s(X)) → QUOTE(activate(X))
FROM(X) → CONS(X, n__from(s(X)))
ACTIVATE(n__nil) → NIL
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → S(X)
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
UNQUOTE(s1(X)) → S(unquote(X))
FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
QUOTE(n__s(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → QUOTE(Y)
UNQUOTE1(nil1) → NIL
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))
QUOTE1(n__first(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
FCONS(X, Z) → CONS(X, Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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:

ACTIVATE(n__sel(X1, X2)) → SEL(X1, X2)
UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → FCONS(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__first(X1, X2)) → FIRST(X1, X2)
UNQUOTE(01) → 0¹
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → UNQUOTE(X)
FIRST(0, Z) → NIL
FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST1(X, activate(Z))
QUOTE1(n__first(X, Z)) → FIRST1(activate(X), activate(Z))
FROM(X) → S(X)
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE(activate(X))
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
UNQUOTE(s1(X)) → UNQUOTE(X)
SEL1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
ACTIVATE(n__0) → 0¹
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → CONS(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → SEL1(activate(X), activate(Z))
ACTIVATE(n__cons(X1, X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → FROM(X)
UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → UNQUOTE1(Z)
SEL1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL1(X, activate(Z))
SEL1(0, cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE(X)
QUOTE1(n__first(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE1(activate(Z))
QUOTE(n__s(X)) → QUOTE(activate(X))
FROM(X) → CONS(X, n__from(s(X)))
ACTIVATE(n__nil) → NIL
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → S(X)
QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
UNQUOTE(s1(X)) → S(unquote(X))
FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
QUOTE(n__s(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → QUOTE(Y)
UNQUOTE1(nil1) → NIL
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))
QUOTE1(n__first(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
FCONS(X, Z) → CONS(X, Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 6 SCCs with 27 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

UNQUOTE(s1(X)) → UNQUOTE(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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.

UNQUOTE(s1(X)) → UNQUOTE(X)

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

POL(s1(x₁)) = 1 + (4)x_1
POL(UNQUOTE(x₁)) = (4)x_1

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → UNQUOTE1(Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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.

UNQUOTE1(cons1(X, Z)) → UNQUOTE1(Z)

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

POL(cons1(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + (4)x_2
POL(UNQUOTE1(x₁)) = (4)x_1

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

ACTIVATE(n__sel(X1, X2)) → SEL(X1, X2)
ACTIVATE(n__first(X1, X2)) → FIRST(X1, X2)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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.

ACTIVATE(n__first(X1, X2)) → FIRST(X1, X2)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

ACTIVATE(n__sel(X1, X2)) → SEL(X1, X2)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(sel(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_2
POL(n__first(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (4)x_2
POL(from(x₁)) = 1 + (4)x_1
POL(n__cons(x₁, x₂)) = x_1 + x_2
POL(n__sel(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_2
POL(activate(x₁)) = 1 + x_1
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 0
POL(n__nil) = 3
POL(first(x₁, x₂)) = 4 + (4)x_2
POL(0) = 4
POL(FIRST(x₁, x₂)) = (2)x_2
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x_1 + x_2
POL(n__from(x₁)) = (4)x_1
POL(n__0) = 3
POL(s(x₁)) = 0
POL(SEL(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_2
POL(ACTIVATE(x₁)) = x_1
POL(nil) = 4

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 2.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
activate(X) → X
0 → n__0
from(X) → n__from(X)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ DependencyGraphProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

ACTIVATE(n__sel(X1, X2)) → SEL(X1, X2)
SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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.

SEL(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL(X, activate(Z))

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

POL(sel(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + (4)x_1 + (2)x_2
POL(n__first(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + (4)x_1
POL(from(x₁)) = 3 + (2)x_1
POL(n__sel(x₁, x₂)) = 4 + (3)x_1 + (3)x_2
POL(n__cons(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (3)x_1 + (3)x_2
POL(activate(x₁)) = 1 + x_1
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 3 + (3)x_1
POL(n__nil) = 4
POL(first(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (3)x_2
POL(0) = 3
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (2)x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 1
POL(n__0) = 3
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + (4)x_1
POL(SEL(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_1
POL(nil) = 4

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

QUOTE(n__s(X)) → QUOTE(activate(X))
QUOTE(n__sel(X, Z)) → SEL1(activate(X), activate(Z))
SEL1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → SEL1(X, activate(Z))
SEL1(0, cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST1(X, activate(Z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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.

FIRST1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST1(X, activate(Z))

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

POL(sel(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + (2)x_2
POL(n__first(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + x_2
POL(from(x₁)) = 2
POL(n__sel(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (4)x_2
POL(n__cons(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (2)x_1 + (3)x_2
POL(activate(x₁)) = 1 + x_1
POL(n__s(x₁)) = (2)x_1
POL(n__nil) = 0
POL(first(x₁, x₂)) = x_1 + x_2
POL(0) = 1
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (2)x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(FIRST1(x₁, x₂)) = x_1
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 0
POL(n__0) = 3
POL(s(x₁)) = 2 + (2)x_1
POL(nil) = 3

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 2.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

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

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

QUOTE1(n__cons(X, Z)) → QUOTE1(activate(Z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
sel(0, cons(X, Z)) → X
first(0, Z) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__first(X, activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
sel1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel1(X, activate(Z))
sel1(0, cons(X, Z)) → quote(X)
first1(0, Z) → nil1
first1(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons1(quote(Y), first1(X, activate(Z)))
quote(n__0) → 01
quote1(n__cons(X, Z)) → cons1(quote(activate(X)), quote1(activate(Z)))
quote1(n__nil) → nil1
quote(n__s(X)) → s1(quote(activate(X)))
quote(n__sel(X, Z)) → sel1(activate(X), activate(Z))
quote1(n__first(X, Z)) → first1(activate(X), activate(Z))
unquote(01) → 0
unquote(s1(X)) → s(unquote(X))
unquote1(nil1) → nil
unquote1(cons1(X, Z)) → fcons(unquote(X), unquote1(Z))
fcons(X, Z) → cons(X, Z)
first(X1, X2) → n__first(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
0 → n__0
cons(X1, X2) → n__cons(X1, X2)
nil → n__nil
s(X) → n__s(X)
sel(X1, X2) → n__sel(X1, X2)
activate(n__first(X1, X2)) → first(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(X)
activate(n__0) → 0
activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
activate(n__nil) → nil
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__sel(X1, X2)) → sel(X1, X2)
activate(X) → X

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