Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmp0wSpdC/Ex15_Luc98

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 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)

↳8 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

a__and(true, X) → mark(X)
a__and(false, Y) → false
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
a__add(0, X) → mark(X)
a__add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
a__first(0, X) → nil
a__first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
a__from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))
mark(and(X1, X2)) → a__and(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(add(X1, X2)) → a__add(mark(X1), X2)
mark(first(X1, X2)) → a__first(mark(X1), mark(X2))
mark(from(X)) → a__from(X)
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(X)
mark(nil) → nil
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
a__and(X1, X2) → and(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)
a__add(X1, X2) → add(X1, X2)
a__first(X1, X2) → first(X1, X2)
a__from(X) → from(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:

A__AND(true, X) → MARK(X)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y)
A__ADD(0, X) → MARK(X)
MARK(and(X1, X2)) → A__AND(mark(X1), X2)
MARK(and(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → A__IF(mark(X1), X2, X3)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(add(X1, X2)) → A__ADD(mark(X1), X2)
MARK(add(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → A__FIRST(mark(X1), mark(X2))
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → MARK(X2)
MARK(from(X)) → A__FROM(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__and(true, X) → mark(X)
a__and(false, Y) → false
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
a__add(0, X) → mark(X)
a__add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
a__first(0, X) → nil
a__first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
a__from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))
mark(and(X1, X2)) → a__and(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(add(X1, X2)) → a__add(mark(X1), X2)
mark(first(X1, X2)) → a__first(mark(X1), mark(X2))
mark(from(X)) → a__from(X)
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(X)
mark(nil) → nil
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
a__and(X1, X2) → and(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)
a__add(X1, X2) → add(X1, X2)
a__first(X1, X2) → first(X1, X2)
a__from(X) → from(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 2 less nodes.

(4) Obligation:

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

MARK(and(X1, X2)) → A__AND(mark(X1), X2)
A__AND(true, X) → MARK(X)
MARK(and(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → A__IF(mark(X1), X2, X3)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(add(X1, X2)) → A__ADD(mark(X1), X2)
A__ADD(0, X) → MARK(X)
MARK(add(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → MARK(X2)
A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__and(true, X) → mark(X)
a__and(false, Y) → false
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
a__add(0, X) → mark(X)
a__add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
a__first(0, X) → nil
a__first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
a__from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))
mark(and(X1, X2)) → a__and(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(add(X1, X2)) → a__add(mark(X1), X2)
mark(first(X1, X2)) → a__first(mark(X1), mark(X2))
mark(from(X)) → a__from(X)
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(X)
mark(nil) → nil
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
a__and(X1, X2) → and(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)
a__add(X1, X2) → add(X1, X2)
a__first(X1, X2) → first(X1, X2)
a__from(X) → from(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.

MARK(and(X1, X2)) → A__AND(mark(X1), X2)
MARK(and(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → A__IF(mark(X1), X2, X3)
A__IF(true, X, Y) → MARK(X)
MARK(if(X1, X2, X3)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(add(X1, X2)) → A__ADD(mark(X1), X2)
MARK(add(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → MARK(X1)
MARK(first(X1, X2)) → MARK(X2)
A__IF(false, X, Y) → MARK(Y)

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

Tags:
MARK has tags [3]
A__AND has tags [4,3]
A__IF has tags [6,5,4]
A__ADD has tags [4,3]

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
and(x1, x2) = and(x1, x2)
mark(x1) = mark(x1)
true = true
if(x1, x2, x3) = if(x1, x2, x3)
add(x1, x2) = add(x1, x2)
0 = 0
first(x1, x2) = first(x1, x2)
false = false
a__and(x1, x2) = a__and
a__if(x1, x2, x3) = a__if(x1, x2)
a__add(x1, x2) = a__add
a__first(x1, x2) = a__first(x1, x2)
from(x1) = from(x1)
a__from(x1) = x1
s(x1) = s
nil = nil
cons(x1, x2) = cons(x2)

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

false > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > true
false > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > add₂
false > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > 0
false > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > [first₂, cons₁]
false > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > a_{_if₂}
a_{_and} > and₂
a_{_and} > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > true
a_{_and} > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > add₂
a_{_and} > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > 0
a_{_and} > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > [first₂, cons₁]
a_{_and} > [mark₁, if₃, a_{_add}, a_{_first₂}, nil] > a_{_if₂}
s > add₂
s > [first₂, cons₁]

Status:

and₂: [2,1]
mark₁: [1]
true: []
if₃: [3,2,1]
add₂: [2,1]
0: []
first₂: [2,1]
false: []
a_{_and}: []
a_{_if₂}: [2,1]
a_{_add}: []
a_{_first₂}: [2,1]
from₁: [1]
s: []
nil: []
cons₁: [1]

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(6) Obligation:

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

A__AND(true, X) → MARK(X)
A__ADD(0, X) → MARK(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__and(true, X) → mark(X)
a__and(false, Y) → false
a__if(true, X, Y) → mark(X)
a__if(false, X, Y) → mark(Y)
a__add(0, X) → mark(X)
a__add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
a__first(0, X) → nil
a__first(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → cons(Y, first(X, Z))
a__from(X) → cons(X, from(s(X)))
mark(and(X1, X2)) → a__and(mark(X1), X2)
mark(if(X1, X2, X3)) → a__if(mark(X1), X2, X3)
mark(add(X1, X2)) → a__add(mark(X1), X2)
mark(first(X1, X2)) → a__first(mark(X1), mark(X2))
mark(from(X)) → a__from(X)
mark(true) → true
mark(false) → false
mark(0) → 0
mark(s(X)) → s(X)
mark(nil) → nil
mark(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(X1, X2)
a__and(X1, X2) → and(X1, X2)
a__if(X1, X2, X3) → if(X1, X2, X3)
a__add(X1, X2) → add(X1, X2)
a__first(X1, X2) → first(X1, X2)
a__from(X) → from(X)

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

(7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

(0) Obligation:

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(2) Obligation:

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(4) Obligation:

(5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(6) Obligation:

(7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

(8) TRUE