Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/Rubioelimdupl.trs

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:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

Q is empty.

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [15] we can switch to innermost.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

Using Dependency Pairs [1,13] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

PURGE(add(N, X)) → RM(N, X)
PURGE(add(N, X)) → PURGE(rm(N, X))
EQ(s(X), s(Y)) → EQ(X, Y)
IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → EQ(N, M)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

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

PURGE(add(N, X)) → RM(N, X)
PURGE(add(N, X)) → PURGE(rm(N, X))
EQ(s(X), s(Y)) → EQ(X, Y)
IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → EQ(N, M)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted some edges using various graph approximations

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

PURGE(add(N, X)) → PURGE(rm(N, X))
PURGE(add(N, X)) → RM(N, X)
EQ(s(X), s(Y)) → EQ(X, Y)
IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → EQ(N, M)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 3 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

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

EQ(s(X), s(Y)) → EQ(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

EQ(s(X), s(Y)) → EQ(X, Y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
EQ(x1, x2) = EQ(x1)
s(x1) = s(x1)

Recursive path order with status [2].
Quasi-Precedence:

[EQ₁, s_1]

Status:

EQ₁: multiset
s₁: multiset

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

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

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(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

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

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

IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
RM(N, add(M, X)) → IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

IFRM(true, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)
IFRM(false, N, add(M, X)) → RM(N, X)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

RM(N, add(M, X)) → IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
IFRM(x1, x2, x3) = x3
true = true
add(x1, x2) = add(x2)
RM(x1, x2) = x2
false = false
eq(x1, x2) = eq
s(x1) = s
0 = 0

Recursive path order with status [2].
Quasi-Precedence:

true > [add₁, eq, s]
0 > false > [add₁, eq, s]

Status:

true: multiset
false: multiset
eq: multiset
0: multiset
s: multiset
add₁: multiset

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                  ↳ QDP

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

RM(N, add(M, X)) → IFRM(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

PURGE(add(N, X)) → PURGE(rm(N, X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(x0, x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

PURGE(add(N, X)) → PURGE(rm(N, X))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
PURGE(x1) = PURGE(x1)
add(x1, x2) = add(x2)
rm(x1, x2) = x2
nil = nil
eq(x1, x2) = eq
s(x1) = s
0 = 0
false = false
true = true
ifrm(x1, x2, x3) = x3

Recursive path order with status [2].
Quasi-Precedence:

eq > [0, true]
false > [PURGE₁, add_1]

Status:

true: multiset
false: multiset
eq: multiset
0: multiset
s: []
PURGE₁: multiset
nil: multiset
add₁: multiset

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

rm(N, nil) → nil
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(X)) → false
eq(s(X), 0) → false
eq(s(X), s(Y)) → eq(X, Y)
rm(N, nil) → nil
rm(N, add(M, X)) → ifrm(eq(N, M), N, add(M, X))
ifrm(true, N, add(M, X)) → rm(N, X)
ifrm(false, N, add(M, X)) → add(M, rm(N, X))
purge(nil) → nil
purge(add(N, X)) → add(N, purge(rm(N, X)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

eq(0, 0)
eq(0, s(x0))
eq(s(x0), 0)
eq(s(x0), s(x1))
rm(x0, nil)
rm(x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(true, x0, add(x1, x2))
ifrm(false, x0, add(x1, x2))
purge(nil)
purge(add(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.