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

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳4 QDP
↳5 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
↳6 QDP
↳7 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
↳8 QDP
↳9 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳10 AND
    ↳11 QDP
        ↳12 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳13 QDP
        ↳14 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳15 TRUE
    ↳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(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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(twice, f), x) → APP(f, app(f, x))
APP(app(twice, f), x) → APP(f, x)
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(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))
APP(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(cons, app(f, x))
APP(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(app(fmap, t_f), x)
APP(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(fmap, t_f)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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 1 SCC with 6 less nodes.

(4) Obligation:

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

APP(app(twice, f), x) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(twice, f), x) → APP(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(f, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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

(5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


APP(app(twice, f), x) → APP(f, x)
APP(app(twice, f), x) → APP(f, app(f, x))
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, x1)

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

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
APP(x1, x2)  =  APP
app(x1, x2)  =  app(x1, x2)
twice  =  twice
map  =  map
cons  =  cons
fmap  =  fmap
t_f  =  t_f
nil  =  nil

Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
twice > APP > [app2, map, tf] > [cons, fmap]

Status:
APP: []
app2: [1,2]
twice: []
map: []
cons: []
fmap: []
tf: []
nil: []


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(6) Obligation:

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

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(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(f, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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

(7) 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, x1)

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

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
APP(x1, x2)  =  x2
app(x1, x2)  =  app(x1, x2)
map  =  map
cons  =  cons
fmap  =  fmap
t_f  =  t_f

Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
map > app2

Status:
app2: [2,1]
map: []
cons: []
fmap: []
tf: []


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(8) 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(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(f, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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

(9) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(10) Complex Obligation (AND)

(11) 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)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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

(12) 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 [2,1,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
APP(x1, x2)  =  x2
app(x1, x2)  =  app(x1, x2)
map  =  map
cons  =  cons

Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
map > app2

Status:
app2: [2,1]
map: []
cons: []


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(13) Obligation:

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

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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

(14) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(15) TRUE

(16) Obligation:

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

APP(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(f, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → APP(f, x)
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, x1)

Tags:
APP has argument tags [0,2,3] and root tag 0

Comparison: DMS
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
APP(x1, x2)  =  x2
app(x1, x2)  =  app(x1, x2)
fmap  =  fmap
cons  =  cons
t_f  =  t_f

Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
trivial

Status:
app2: [1,2]
fmap: []
cons: []
tf: []


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(twice, f), x) → app(f, app(f, x))
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(fmap, nil), x) → nil
app(app(fmap, app(app(cons, f), t_f)), x) → app(app(cons, app(f, x)), app(app(fmap, t_f), x))

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