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

(0) Obligation:

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

app(nil, YS) → YS
app(cons(X), YS) → cons(X)
from(X) → cons(X)
zWadr(nil, YS) → nil
zWadr(XS, nil) → nil
zWadr(cons(X), cons(Y)) → cons(app(Y, cons(X)))
prefix(L) → cons(nil)

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Precedence:

from₁ > cons₁ > app₂ > nil
zWadr₂ > cons₁ > app₂ > nil
prefix₁ > cons₁ > app₂ > nil

Status:

app₂: multiset
nil: multiset
cons₁: multiset
from₁: multiset
zWadr₂: multiset
prefix₁: multiset

With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

app(nil, YS) → YS
app(cons(X), YS) → cons(X)
from(X) → cons(X)
zWadr(nil, YS) → nil
zWadr(XS, nil) → nil
zWadr(cons(X), cons(Y)) → cons(app(Y, cons(X)))
prefix(L) → cons(nil)

(2) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
R is empty.
Q is empty.

(3) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven.

(4) TRUE