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:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.

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

MAX(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → MAX(g(g(x, y), z))
MEM(g(x, y), z) → MEM(x, z)
F(x, g(y, z)) → F(x, y)
++1(x, g(y, z)) → ++1(x, y)
MEM(x, max(x)) → NULL(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

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

MAX(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → MAX(g(g(x, y), z))
MEM(g(x, y), z) → MEM(x, z)
F(x, g(y, z)) → F(x, y)
++1(x, g(y, z)) → ++1(x, y)
MEM(x, max(x)) → NULL(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

MEM(g(x, y), z) → MEM(x, z)
MAX(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → MAX(g(g(x, y), z))
F(x, g(y, z)) → F(x, y)
++1(x, g(y, z)) → ++1(x, y)
MEM(x, max(x)) → NULL(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 4 SCCs with 1 less node.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

MAX(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → MAX(g(g(x, y), z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.
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.


MAX(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → MAX(g(g(x, y), z))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
MAX(x1)  =  MAX(x1)
g(x1, x2)  =  g(x1)
u  =  u

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:
g1 > MAX1
u > MAX1


The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
                  ↳ QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

MEM(g(x, y), z) → MEM(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.
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.


MEM(g(x, y), z) → MEM(x, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
MEM(x1, x2)  =  x1
g(x1, x2)  =  g(x1)

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:
trivial


The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
                  ↳ QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP

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

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
              ↳ QDP

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

++1(x, g(y, z)) → ++1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.
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.


++1(x, g(y, z)) → ++1(x, y)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
++1(x1, x2)  =  ++1(x2)
g(x1, x2)  =  g(x1)

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:
g1 > ++^11


The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
                  ↳ QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof
              ↳ QDP

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

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

F(x, g(y, z)) → F(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

Q is empty.
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.


F(x, g(y, z)) → F(x, y)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1, x2)  =  F(x2)
g(x1, x2)  =  g(x1)

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:
g1 > F1


The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ AND
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ QDPOrderProof
                  ↳ QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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