Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳4 AND
    ↳5 QDP
        ↳6 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳9 QDP
        ↳10 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳11 TRUE
    ↳12 QDP
        ↳13 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳14 QDP
        ↳15 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳16 QDP
        ↳17 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳18 QDP
        ↳19 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳20 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(2) Obligation:

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

APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(append, t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(cons, app(f, h))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(append, l2)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(append, app(app(map, f), l1))
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 7 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(6) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → APP(app(append, t), l)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
APP(x0, x1, x2)  =  APP(x0)

Tags:
APP has argument tags [1,2,1] and root tag 0

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(APP(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1   
POL(app(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(append) = 0   
POL(cons) = 1   
POL(nil) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(8) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
APP(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → APP(app(append, l2), l3)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
APP(x0, x1, x2)  =  APP(x1)

Tags:
APP has argument tags [0,0,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(APP(x1, x2)) = 0   
POL(app(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(append) = 1   
POL(cons) = 1   
POL(nil) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(9) Obligation:

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

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(10) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(11) TRUE

(12) Obligation:

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

APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(13) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(f, h)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
APP(x0, x1, x2)  =  APP(x0, x2)

Tags:
APP has argument tags [1,3,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(APP(x1, x2)) = x1   
POL(app(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(append) = 0   
POL(cons) = 1   
POL(map) = 1   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(14) Obligation:

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

APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(15) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → APP(app(map, f), t)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
APP(x0, x1, x2)  =  APP(x2)

Tags:
APP has argument tags [1,1,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(APP(x1, x2)) = 0   
POL(app(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(append) = 0   
POL(cons) = 1   
POL(map) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(16) Obligation:

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

APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(17) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l1)
APP(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → APP(app(map, f), l2)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
APP(x0, x1, x2)  =  APP(x0, x2)

Tags:
APP has argument tags [1,1,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(APP(x1, x2)) = 0   
POL(app(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(append) = 1   
POL(map) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(18) Obligation:

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

app(app(append, nil), l) → l
app(app(append, app(app(cons, h), t)), l) → app(app(cons, h), app(app(append, t), l))
app(app(map, f), nil) → nil
app(app(map, f), app(app(cons, h), t)) → app(app(cons, app(f, h)), app(app(map, f), t))
app(app(append, app(app(append, l1), l2)), l3) → app(app(append, l1), app(app(append, l2), l3))
app(app(map, f), app(app(append, l1), l2)) → app(app(append, app(app(map, f), l1)), app(app(map, f), l2))

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

(19) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(20) TRUE