(0) Obligation:

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

app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))), app(app(times, x), app(s, z)))
app(app(times, x), 0) → 0
app(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), y)), x)
app(app(plus, x), 0) → x
app(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
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.

(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:

APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))), app(app(times, x), app(s, z)))
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0))))
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0))
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(times, app(s, z))
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, x), app(s, z))
APP(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(plus, app(app(times, x), y)), x)
APP(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → APP(plus, app(app(times, x), y))
APP(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(times, x), y)
APP(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → APP(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
APP(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(plus, x), y)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(map, f), xs))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(cons, app(f, x))
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)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x)
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(filter2, app(f, x))
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(cons, x), app(app(filter, f), xs))
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(cons, x)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(filter, f)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))), app(app(times, x), app(s, z)))
app(app(times, x), 0) → 0
app(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), y)), x)
app(app(plus, x), 0) → x
app(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
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.

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 3 SCCs with 17 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

APP(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(plus, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))), app(app(times, x), app(s, z)))
app(app(times, x), 0) → 0
app(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), y)), x)
app(app(plus, x), 0) → x
app(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
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.

(6) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(7) Obligation:

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

APP(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(plus, x), y)

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

(8) ATransformationProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We have applied the A-Transformation [FROCOS05] to get from an applicative problem to a standard problem.

(9) Obligation:

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

plus(x, s(y)) → plus(x, y)

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

(10) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] 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:

  • plus(x, s(y)) → plus(x, y)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

(11) TRUE

(12) Obligation:

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

APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, x), app(s, z))
APP(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(times, x), y)
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))), app(app(times, x), app(s, z)))
app(app(times, x), 0) → 0
app(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), y)), x)
app(app(plus, x), 0) → x
app(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
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.

(13) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its arguments. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [FROCOS05] from R.

(14) Obligation:

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

APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, x), app(s, z))
APP(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → APP(app(times, x), y)
APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → APP(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(times, x), 0) → 0
app(app(plus, x), 0) → x
app(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))

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

(15) UsableRulesReductionPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

First, we A-transformed [FROCOS05] the QDP-Problem. Then we obtain the following A-transformed DP problem.
The pairs P are:

times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, s(z))
times1(x, s(y)) → times1(x, y)
times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))

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

times(x, 0) → 0
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

Q is empty.

By using the usable rules with reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with a polynomial ordering [POLO], all dependency pairs and the corresponding usable rules [FROCOS05] can be oriented non-strictly. All non-usable rules are removed, and those dependency pairs and usable rules that have been oriented strictly or contain non-usable symbols in their left-hand side are removed as well.

No dependency pairs are removed.

No rules are removed from R.

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(0) = 0   
POL(plus(x1, x2)) = 2·x1 + x2   
POL(s(x1)) = x1   
POL(times(x1, x2)) = x1 + 2·x2   
POL(times1(x1, x2)) = x1 + 2·x2   

(16) Obligation:

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

times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, s(z))
times1(x, s(y)) → times1(x, y)
times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, 0) → 0
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(17) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.
Strictly oriented dependency pairs:

times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, s(z))
times1(x, s(y)) → times1(x, y)

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

plus(x, 0) → x

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(0) = 0   
POL(plus(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 + x2   
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1   
POL(times(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(times1(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   

(18) Obligation:

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

times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, 0) → 0
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(19) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(0) = 0   
POL(plus(x1, x2)) = 2·x1 + 2·x2   
POL(s(x1)) = 2 + x1   
POL(times(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(times1(x1, x2)) = x1 + 2·x2   

(20) Obligation:

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

times1(x, plus(y, s(z))) → times1(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, 0) → 0

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

(21) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(22) TRUE

(23) Obligation:

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

APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
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(filter, f), xs)
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)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(s, z))) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), app(app(plus, y), app(app(times, app(s, z)), 0)))), app(app(times, x), app(s, z)))
app(app(times, x), 0) → 0
app(app(times, x), app(s, y)) → app(app(plus, app(app(times, x), y)), x)
app(app(plus, x), 0) → x
app(app(plus, x), app(s, y)) → app(s, app(app(plus, x), y))
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.

(24) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] 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:

  • APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(f, x)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(map, f), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

  • APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, x), xs)) → APP(app(app(app(filter2, app(f, x)), f), x), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2

  • APP(app(app(app(filter2, true), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2

  • APP(app(app(app(filter2, false), f), x), xs) → APP(app(filter, f), xs)
    The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2

(25) TRUE