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(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
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(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
LAST -> APP2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
LAST -> APP2(compose, hd)
APP2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(app2(cons, x), l)
INIT -> APP2(app2(compose, tl), reverse)
INIT -> APP2(compose, tl)
APP2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(reverse2, xs)
INIT -> APP2(compose, reverse)
APP2(reverse, l) -> APP2(reverse2, l)
APP2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
APP2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(g, app2(f, x))
APP2(reverse, l) -> APP2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
INIT -> APP2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
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:
LAST -> APP2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
LAST -> APP2(compose, hd)
APP2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(app2(cons, x), l)
INIT -> APP2(app2(compose, tl), reverse)
INIT -> APP2(compose, tl)
APP2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(reverse2, xs)
INIT -> APP2(compose, reverse)
APP2(reverse, l) -> APP2(reverse2, l)
APP2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
APP2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(g, app2(f, x))
APP2(reverse, l) -> APP2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
INIT -> APP2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph contains 2 SCCs with 10 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(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
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(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> APP2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
Used argument filtering: APP2(x1, x2) = x1
app2(x1, x2) = app1(x2)
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(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
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(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(g, app2(f, x))
APP2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(f, x)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
app2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
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(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(g, app2(f, x))
APP2(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> APP2(f, x)
Used argument filtering: APP2(x1, x2) = x1
app2(x1, x2) = app2(x1, x2)
compose = compose
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(app2(app2(compose, f), g), x) -> app2(g, app2(f, x))
app2(reverse, l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, l), nil)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), l) -> l
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)), l) -> app2(app2(reverse2, xs), app2(app2(cons, x), l))
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> x
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x), xs)) -> xs
last -> app2(app2(compose, hd), reverse)
init -> app2(app2(compose, reverse), app2(app2(compose, tl), reverse))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
app2(app2(app2(compose, x0), x1), x2)
app2(reverse, x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, nil), x0)
app2(app2(reverse2, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1)), x2)
app2(hd, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
app2(tl, app2(app2(cons, x0), x1))
last
init
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.