Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpNND_1

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(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(append, l2)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(append, t)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(cons, app(f, h))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(append, app(app(map, f), l1))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(append, l2)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(append, t)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(cons, app(f, h))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(append, app(app(map, f), l1))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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 7 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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.

APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(APP(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_1
POL(append) = 4
POL(cons) = 0
POL(app(x₁, x₂)) = (1/4)x_1 + (4)x_2
POL(nil) = 0

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

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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.

APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)

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

POL(APP(x₁, x₂)) = (2)x_1
POL(append) = 0
POL(cons) = 0
POL(app(x₁, x₂)) = 4 + (2)x_2

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

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

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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:

APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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.

APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)

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

POL(APP(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_1 + (1/4)x_2
POL(append) = 4
POL(cons) = 1/2
POL(map) = 4
POL(app(x₁, x₂)) = 1/4 + (1/4)x_1 + (4)x_2

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 11/128.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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.