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

(0) Obligation:

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

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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:

A(h, h, h, x) → S(x)
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → S(h)
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)
A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)
A(s(l), h, h, z) → A(l, z, h, z)
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → S(s(+(x, y)))
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → S(+(x, y))
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(x, +(y, z))
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(y, z)
APP(cons(x, l), k) → APP(l, k)
SUM(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → SUM(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))
SUM(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → A(x, y, h, h)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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 4 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

APP(cons(x, l), k) → APP(l, k)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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(cons(x, l), k) → APP(l, k)

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 [3,1,0] 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)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₂   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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:

+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(x, +(y, z))
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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.

+¹(s(x), s(y)) → +¹(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
+¹(x0, x1, x2)  =  +¹(x1)

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

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

POL(+(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(+¹(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
POL(1) = 1   
POL(h) = 1   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(12) Obligation:

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

+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(x, +(y, z))
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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.

+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(x, +(y, z))
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(y, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
+¹(x0, x1, x2)  =  +¹(x0)

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

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

POL(+(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   
POL(+¹(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(1) = 0   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(14) Obligation:

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

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(15) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(16) TRUE

(17) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)
A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)
A(s(l), h, h, z) → A(l, z, h, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(18) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(s(l), h, h, z) → A(l, z, h, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
A(x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)  =  A(x0)

Tags:
A has argument tags [0,0,0,6,6] and root tag 0

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

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₁   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂ + x₃   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(19) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)
A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(20) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
A(x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)  =  A(x0, x1, x2)

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

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

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₁   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(21) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(22) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
A(x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)  =  A(x3)

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

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

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₂   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₁   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(23) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(24) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
A(x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)  =  A(x0, x1, x2, x4)

Tags:
A has argument tags [0,0,0,1,6] and root tag 0

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

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₁ + x₂ + x₄   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(25) Obligation:

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

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(26) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(27) TRUE

(28) Obligation:

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

SUM(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → SUM(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(29) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

SUM(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → SUM(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

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

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

POL(1) = 1   
POL(SUM(x₁)) = 0   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 0   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₂   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(30) Obligation:

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

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
app(nil, k) → k
app(l, nil) → l
app(cons(x, l), k) → cons(x, app(l, k))
sum(cons(x, nil)) → cons(x, nil)
sum(cons(x, cons(y, l))) → sum(cons(a(x, y, h, h), l))

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

(31) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(32) TRUE