Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could not be shown:

0 QTRS
↳1 Overlay + Local Confluence (⇔)
↳2 QTRS
↳3 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳4 QDP
↳5 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳6 AND
  ↳7 QDP
  ↳8 QDP
    ↳9 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
    ↳10 QDP
    ↳11 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
    ↳12 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

Q is empty.

(1) Overlay + Local Confluence (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [NOC] we can switch to innermost.

(2) Obligation:

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

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))
from(x0)

(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(4) Obligation:

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

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)
FROM(X) → FROM(s(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))
from(x0)

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

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs.

(6) Complex Obligation (AND)

(7) Obligation:

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

FROM(X) → FROM(s(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))
from(x0)

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

(8) Obligation:

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

FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))
from(x0)

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

(9) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


FIRST(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → FIRST(X, Z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
FIRST(x1, x2)  =  x1
s(x1)  =  s(x1)
cons(x1, x2)  =  x2
first(x1, x2)  =  x1
0  =  0
nil  =  nil
from(x1)  =  from

Recursive Path Order [RPO].
Precedence:
0 > nil
from > s1

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

(10) Obligation:

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

first(0, X) → nil
first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

first(0, x0)
first(s(x0), cons(x1, x2))
from(x0)

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

(11) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(12) TRUE