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:

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check

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

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

Q is empty.

The TRS is non-overlapping. Hence, we can switch to innermost.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))


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

APP2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> APP2(g, y)
APP2(f, app2(s, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> APP2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y))
APP2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> APP2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

APP2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> APP2(g, y)
APP2(f, app2(s, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> APP2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y))
APP2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> APP2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph contains 2 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
              ↳ QDP

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

APP2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> APP2(g, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using an argument filtering and a montonic ordering, at least one Dependency Pair of this SCC can be strictly oriented.

APP2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> APP2(g, y)
Used argument filtering: APP2(x1, x2)  =  x2
app2(x1, x2)  =  app1(x2)
cons  =  cons
0  =  0
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence: trivial 


↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
                  ↳ QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof
              ↳ QDP

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

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof

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

APP2(f, app2(s, x)) -> APP2(f, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using an argument filtering and a montonic ordering, at least one Dependency Pair of this SCC can be strictly oriented.

APP2(f, app2(s, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
Used argument filtering: APP2(x1, x2)  =  x2
app2(x1, x2)  =  app1(x2)
s  =  s
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence: trivial 


↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
                  ↳ QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

app2(f, app2(s, x)) -> app2(f, x)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), y)) -> app2(g, y)
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x)), y)) -> app2(s, x)
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x), y)) -> app2(h, app2(g, app2(app2(cons, x), y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(f, app2(s, x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, 0), x0))
app2(g, app2(app2(cons, app2(s, x0)), x1))
app2(h, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.