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 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳9 TRUE
    ↳10 QDP
        ↳11 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳12 QDP
        ↳13 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳14 TRUE
    ↳15 QDP
        ↳16 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳17 QDP
        ↳18 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳19 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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:

MSORT(.(x, y)) → MIN(x, y)
MSORT(.(x, y)) → MSORT(del(min(x, y), .(x, y)))
MSORT(.(x, y)) → DEL(min(x, y), .(x, y))
MIN(x, .(y, z)) → MIN(x, z)
MIN(x, .(y, z)) → MIN(y, z)
DEL(x, .(y, z)) → DEL(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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 3 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

DEL(x, .(y, z)) → DEL(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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.


DEL(x, .(y, z)) → DEL(x, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
DEL(x0, x1, x2)  =  DEL(x2)

Tags:
DEL has argument tags [1,3,2] 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.
DEL(x1, x2)  =  DEL(x1)
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x1, x2)

Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
.2 > DEL1

Status:
DEL1: [1]
.2: [1,2]


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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

(8) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(9) TRUE

(10) Obligation:

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

MIN(x, .(y, z)) → MIN(y, z)
MIN(x, .(y, z)) → MIN(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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

(11) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


MIN(x, .(y, z)) → MIN(y, z)
MIN(x, .(y, z)) → MIN(x, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
MIN(x0, x1, x2)  =  MIN(x0, x1)

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

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
trivial

Status:
MIN2: [2,1]
.2: [1,2]


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(12) Obligation:

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

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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

(13) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(14) TRUE

(15) Obligation:

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

MSORT(.(x, y)) → MSORT(del(min(x, y), .(x, y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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

(16) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


MSORT(.(x, y)) → MSORT(del(min(x, y), .(x, y)))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
MSORT(x0, x1)  =  MSORT(x0)

Tags:
MSORT has argument tags [0,1] 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.
MSORT(x1)  =  MSORT(x1)
.(x1, x2)  =  .(x2)
del(x1, x2)  =  del
min(x1, x2)  =  min
nil  =  nil
if(x1, x2, x3)  =  if
<=(x1, x2)  =  <=(x1, x2)
=(x1, x2)  =  =(x1, x2)

Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:
[MSORT1, .1, <=2] > del > nil > =2
[MSORT1, .1, <=2] > del > if > =2
[MSORT1, .1, <=2] > min > if > =2

Status:
MSORT1: [1]
.1: [1]
del: []
min: []
nil: []
if: []
<=2: [1,2]
=2: [2,1]


The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

(17) Obligation:

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

msort(nil) → nil
msort(.(x, y)) → .(min(x, y), msort(del(min(x, y), .(x, y))))
min(x, nil) → x
min(x, .(y, z)) → if(<=(x, y), min(x, z), min(y, z))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, .(y, z)) → if(=(x, y), z, .(y, del(x, z)))

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

(18) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(19) TRUE