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:

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.


QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.

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

APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), z)
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(f, x)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), y)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), z)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(or, app(app(and, x), y))
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(or, app(app(and, x), y))
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(or, app(not, x))
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), y)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(and, app(not, x))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(cons, x)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(filter2, app(f, x))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(cons, app(f, x))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(and, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), z)
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(f, x)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), y)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), z)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(or, app(app(and, x), y))
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(or, app(app(and, x), y))
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(or, app(not, x))
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), y)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(and, app(not, x))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(cons, x)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(filter2, app(f, x))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(cons, app(f, x))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(and, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 3 SCCs with 18 less nodes.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), z)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), z)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), y)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ ATransformationProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), z)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), z)
APP(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → APP(app(and, x), y)
APP(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → APP(app(and, x), y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We have applied the A-Transformation [17] to get from an applicative problem to a standard problem.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ ATransformationProof
QDP
                    ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

and(or(y, z), x) → and(x, z)
and(or(y, z), x) → and(x, y)
and(x, or(y, z)) → and(x, y)
and(x, or(y, z)) → and(x, z)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP

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

APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ ATransformationProof
          ↳ QDP

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

APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, x)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → APP(not, y)
APP(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → APP(not, x)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We have applied the A-Transformation [17] to get from an applicative problem to a standard problem.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ ATransformationProof
QDP
                    ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP

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

not(and(x, y)) → not(x)
not(and(x, y)) → not(y)
not(or(x, y)) → not(x)
not(or(x, y)) → not(y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(not, app(not, x)) → x
app(not, app(app(or, x), y)) → app(app(and, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(not, app(app(and, x), y)) → app(app(or, app(not, x)), app(not, y))
app(app(and, x), app(app(or, y), z)) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
app(app(and, app(app(or, y), z)), x) → app(app(or, app(app(and, x), y)), app(app(and, x), z))
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.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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: