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(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ Non-Overlap Check

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

app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

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(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(leaf, x1))
app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(app2(app2(branch, x1), x2), x3))


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

APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), r)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), l)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l))
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(branch, app2(f, x))
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> APP2(leaf, app2(f, x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(leaf, x1))
app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(app2(app2(branch, x1), x2), x3))

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(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), r)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), l)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l))
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(branch, app2(f, x))
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> APP2(leaf, app2(f, x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(leaf, x1))
app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(app2(app2(branch, x1), x2), x3))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph contains 1 SCC with 4 less nodes.

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

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

APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), r)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), l)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(f, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(leaf, x1))
app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(app2(app2(branch, x1), x2), x3))

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(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), r)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(app2(mapbt, f), l)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> APP2(f, x)
APP2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> APP2(f, x)
Used argument filtering: APP2(x1, x2)  =  x2
app2(x1, x2)  =  app2(x1, x2)
branch  =  branch
leaf  =  leaf
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence: trivial 


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

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

app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(leaf, x)) -> app2(leaf, app2(f, x))
app2(app2(mapbt, f), app2(app2(app2(branch, x), l), r)) -> app2(app2(app2(branch, app2(f, x)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), l)), app2(app2(mapbt, f), r))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(leaf, x1))
app2(app2(mapbt, x0), app2(app2(app2(branch, x1), x2), x3))

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