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

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳4 QDP
↳5 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
↳6 QDP
↳7 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳8 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

fst(0, Z) → nil
fst(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__fst(activate(X), activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(n__add(activate(X), Y))
len(nil) → 0
len(cons(X, Z)) → s(n__len(activate(Z)))
fst(X1, X2) → n__fst(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
len(X) → n__len(X)
activate(n__fst(X1, X2)) → fst(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__len(X)) → len(activate(X))
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(2) Obligation:

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

FST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
FST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
ADD(s(X), Y) → S(n__add(activate(X), Y))
ADD(s(X), Y) → ACTIVATE(X)
LEN(cons(X, Z)) → S(n__len(activate(Z)))
LEN(cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → FST(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → FROM(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → S(X)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ADD(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__len(X)) → LEN(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(n__len(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fst(0, Z) → nil
fst(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__fst(activate(X), activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(n__add(activate(X), Y))
len(nil) → 0
len(cons(X, Z)) → s(n__len(activate(Z)))
fst(X1, X2) → n__fst(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
len(X) → n__len(X)
activate(n__fst(X1, X2)) → fst(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__len(X)) → len(activate(X))
activate(X) → X

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

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 1 SCC with 4 less nodes.

(4) Obligation:

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

ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → FST(activate(X1), activate(X2))
FST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ADD(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ADD(s(X), Y) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__len(X)) → LEN(activate(X))
LEN(cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
ACTIVATE(n__len(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
FST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fst(0, Z) → nil
fst(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__fst(activate(X), activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(n__add(activate(X), Y))
len(nil) → 0
len(cons(X, Z)) → s(n__len(activate(Z)))
fst(X1, X2) → n__fst(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
len(X) → n__len(X)
activate(n__fst(X1, X2)) → fst(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__len(X)) → len(activate(X))
activate(X) → X

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

(5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → FST(activate(X1), activate(X2))
FST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__fst(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ADD(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ADD(s(X), Y) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__len(X)) → LEN(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(n__len(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
FST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACTIVATE(x1)  =  ACTIVATE(x1)
n__fst(x1, x2)  =  n__fst(x1, x2)
FST(x1, x2)  =  FST(x1, x2)
activate(x1)  =  x1
s(x1)  =  x1
cons(x1, x2)  =  x2
n__from(x1)  =  n__from(x1)
n__add(x1, x2)  =  n__add(x1, x2)
ADD(x1, x2)  =  ADD(x1)
n__len(x1)  =  n__len(x1)
LEN(x1)  =  LEN(x1)
fst(x1, x2)  =  fst(x1, x2)
0  =  0
nil  =  nil
from(x1)  =  from(x1)
n__s(x1)  =  x1
add(x1, x2)  =  add(x1, x2)
len(x1)  =  len(x1)

Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
[nfst2, FST2, fst2] > [ACTIVATE1, LEN1]
[nfst2, FST2, fst2] > nil > [nlen1, 0, len1]
[nfrom1, from1] > [ACTIVATE1, LEN1]
[nadd2, ADD1, add2] > [ACTIVATE1, LEN1]

Status:
ACTIVATE1: [1]
nfst2: multiset
FST2: multiset
nfrom1: multiset
nadd2: multiset
ADD1: multiset
nlen1: [1]
LEN1: [1]
fst2: multiset
0: multiset
nil: multiset
from1: multiset
add2: multiset
len1: [1]


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

fst(0, Z) → nil
fst(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__fst(activate(X), activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(n__add(activate(X), Y))
len(nil) → 0
len(cons(X, Z)) → s(n__len(activate(Z)))
fst(X1, X2) → n__fst(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
len(X) → n__len(X)
activate(n__fst(X1, X2)) → fst(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__len(X)) → len(activate(X))
activate(X) → X

(6) Obligation:

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

LEN(cons(X, Z)) → ACTIVATE(Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fst(0, Z) → nil
fst(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, n__fst(activate(X), activate(Z)))
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(n__add(activate(X), Y))
len(nil) → 0
len(cons(X, Z)) → s(n__len(activate(Z)))
fst(X1, X2) → n__fst(X1, X2)
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
len(X) → n__len(X)
activate(n__fst(X1, X2)) → fst(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(X)
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__len(X)) → len(activate(X))
activate(X) → X

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

(7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(8) TRUE