Left Termination proof of /tmp/tmpEYsT6P/slowsort-bf.pl

Left Termination of the query pattern ss_in_2(g, a) w.r.t. the given Prolog program could successfully be proven:

0 Prolog

  ↳1 PrologToPiTRSProof (⇐)

    ↳2 PiTRS

    ↳3 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)

    ↳4 PiDP

    ↳5 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)

    ↳6 AND

      ↳7 PiDP

        ↳8 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳9 PiDP

        ↳10 PiDPToQDPProof (⇔)

        ↳11 QDP

        ↳12 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)

        ↳13 TRUE

      ↳14 PiDP

        ↳15 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳16 PiDP

        ↳17 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳18 QDP

        ↳19 UsableRulesReductionPairsProof (⇔)

        ↳20 QDP

        ↳21 MRRProof (⇔)

        ↳22 QDP

        ↳23 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)

        ↳24 TRUE

      ↳25 PiDP

        ↳26 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳27 PiDP

        ↳28 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳29 QDP

        ↳30 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)

        ↳31 TRUE

      ↳32 PiDP

        ↳33 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳34 PiDP

        ↳35 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳36 QDP

        ↳37 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)

        ↳38 TRUE

      ↳39 PiDP

        ↳40 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳41 PiDP

        ↳42 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳43 QDP

        ↳44 MRRProof (⇔)

        ↳45 QDP

        ↳46 PisEmptyProof (⇔)

        ↳47 TRUE

  ↳48 PrologToPiTRSProof (⇐)

    ↳49 PiTRS

    ↳50 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)

    ↳51 PiDP

    ↳52 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)

    ↳53 AND

      ↳54 PiDP

        ↳55 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳56 PiDP

        ↳57 PiDPToQDPProof (⇔)

        ↳58 QDP

        ↳59 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)

        ↳60 TRUE

      ↳61 PiDP

        ↳62 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳63 PiDP

        ↳64 PiDPToQDPProof (⇔)

        ↳65 QDP

        ↳66 MRRProof (⇔)

        ↳67 QDP

        ↳68 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)

        ↳69 TRUE

      ↳70 PiDP

        ↳71 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳72 PiDP

        ↳73 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳74 QDP

        ↳75 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)

        ↳76 TRUE

      ↳77 PiDP

        ↳78 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳79 PiDP

        ↳80 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳81 QDP

        ↳82 QDPSizeChangeProof (⇔)

        ↳83 TRUE

      ↳84 PiDP

        ↳85 UsableRulesProof (⇔)

        ↳86 PiDP

        ↳87 PiDPToQDPProof (⇐)

        ↳88 QDP

(0) Obligation:

Clauses:

ss(Xs, Ys) :- ','(perm(Xs, Ys), ordered(Ys)).
perm([], []).
perm(Xs, .(X, Ys)) :- ','(app(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs), ','(app(X1s, X2s, Zs), perm(Zs, Ys))).
app([], X, X).
app(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) :- app(Xs, Ys, Zs).
ordered([]).
ordered(.(X1, [])).
ordered(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) :- ','(less(X, s(Y)), ordered(.(Y, Xs))).
less(0, s(X2)).
less(s(X), s(Y)) :- less(X, Y).

Queries:

ss(g,a).

(1) PrologToPiTRSProof (SOUND transformation)

We use the technique of [LOPSTR]. With regard to the inferred argument filtering the predicates were used in the following modes:
ss_in: (b,f)
perm_in: (b,f)
app_in: (f,f,b) (b,b,f)
ordered_in: (b)
less_in: (b,b)
Transforming Prolog into the following Term Rewriting System:
Pi-finite rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

Infinitary Constructor Rewriting Termination of PiTRS implies Termination of Prolog

(2) Obligation:

Pi-finite rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(3) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LOPSTR] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → PERM_IN_GA(Xs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → APP_IN_AAG(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_AAG(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → APP_IN_GGA(X1s, X2s, Zs)
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_GGA(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_GA(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_GA(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → ORDERED_IN_G(Ys)
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → LESS_IN_GG(X, s(Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_GG(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_G(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
ss_in_ga(x1, x2) = ss_in_ga(x1)
U1_ga(x1, x2, x3) = U1_ga(x3)
perm_in_ga(x1, x2) = perm_in_ga(x1)
[] = []
perm_out_ga(x1, x2) = perm_out_ga(x2)
U3_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_ga(x4)
app_in_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_aag(x3)
app_out_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_aag(x1, x2)
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
U6_aag(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_aag(x1, x5)
U4_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U4_ga(x2, x4)
app_in_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_gga(x1, x2)
app_out_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_gga(x3)
U6_gga(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_gga(x1, x5)
U5_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U5_ga(x2, x4)
U2_ga(x1, x2, x3) = U2_ga(x2, x3)
ordered_in_g(x1) = ordered_in_g(x1)
ordered_out_g(x1) = ordered_out_g
U7_g(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U7_g(x2, x3, x4)
less_in_gg(x1, x2) = less_in_gg(x1, x2)
0 = 0
s(x1) = s(x1)
less_out_gg(x1, x2) = less_out_gg
U9_gg(x1, x2, x3) = U9_gg(x3)
U8_g(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U8_g(x4)
ss_out_ga(x1, x2) = ss_out_ga(x2)
SS_IN_GA(x1, x2) = SS_IN_GA(x1)
U1_GA(x1, x2, x3) = U1_GA(x3)
PERM_IN_GA(x1, x2) = PERM_IN_GA(x1)
U3_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_GA(x4)
APP_IN_AAG(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_AAG(x3)
U6_AAG(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_AAG(x1, x5)
U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U4_GA(x2, x4)
APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2)
U6_GGA(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_GGA(x1, x5)
U5_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U5_GA(x2, x4)
U2_GA(x1, x2, x3) = U2_GA(x2, x3)
ORDERED_IN_G(x1) = ORDERED_IN_G(x1)
U7_G(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U7_G(x2, x3, x4)
LESS_IN_GG(x1, x2) = LESS_IN_GG(x1, x2)
U9_GG(x1, x2, x3) = U9_GG(x3)
U8_G(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U8_G(x4)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(4) Obligation:

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

SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → PERM_IN_GA(Xs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → APP_IN_AAG(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_AAG(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → APP_IN_GGA(X1s, X2s, Zs)
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_GGA(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_GA(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_GA(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → ORDERED_IN_G(Ys)
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → LESS_IN_GG(X, s(Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_GG(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_G(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(5) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 5 SCCs with 12 less nodes.

(6) Complex Obligation (AND)

(7) Obligation:

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

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(8) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(9) Obligation:

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

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)

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

(10) PiDPToQDPProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(11) Obligation:

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

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)

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

(12) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(13) TRUE

(14) Obligation:

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

U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(15) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(16) Obligation:

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

U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
less_in_gg(x1, x2) = less_in_gg(x1, x2)
0 = 0
s(x1) = s(x1)
less_out_gg(x1, x2) = less_out_gg
U9_gg(x1, x2, x3) = U9_gg(x3)
ORDERED_IN_G(x1) = ORDERED_IN_G(x1)
U7_G(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U7_G(x2, x3, x4)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(17) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(18) Obligation:

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

U7_G(Y, Xs, less_out_gg) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(less_out_gg) → less_out_gg

The set Q consists of the following terms:

less_in_gg(x0, x1)
U9_gg(x0)

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

(19) UsableRulesReductionPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the usable rules with reduction pair processor [LPAR04] with a polynomial ordering [POLO], all dependency pairs and the corresponding usable rules [FROCOS05] can be oriented non-strictly. All non-usable rules are removed, and those dependency pairs and usable rules that have been oriented strictly or contain non-usable symbols in their left-hand side are removed as well.

No dependency pairs are removed.

The following rules are removed from R:

less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(.(x₁, x₂)) = 2·x₁ + 2·x₂
POL(0) = 2
POL(ORDERED_IN_G(x₁)) = 1 + x₁
POL(U7_G(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 1 + 2·x₁ + 2·x₂ + 2·x₃
POL(U9_gg(x₁)) = x₁
POL(less_in_gg(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(less_out_gg) = 0
POL(s(x₁)) = x₁

(20) Obligation:

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

U7_G(Y, Xs, less_out_gg) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(less_out_gg) → less_out_gg

The set Q consists of the following terms:

less_in_gg(x0, x1)
U9_gg(x0)

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

(21) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.
Strictly oriented dependency pairs:

U7_G(Y, Xs, less_out_gg) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

U9_gg(less_out_gg) → less_out_gg

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(.(x₁, x₂)) = 2·x₁ + 2·x₂
POL(ORDERED_IN_G(x₁)) = 1 + x₁
POL(U7_G(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 2·x₁ + 2·x₂ + x₃
POL(U9_gg(x₁)) = 2 + x₁
POL(less_in_gg(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(less_out_gg) = 2
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

(22) Obligation:

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

ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(less_in_gg(X, Y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

less_in_gg(x0, x1)
U9_gg(x0)

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

(23) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(24) TRUE

(25) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(26) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(27) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(28) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(29) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys)

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

(30) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

(31) TRUE

(32) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(33) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(34) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
APP_IN_AAG(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_AAG(x3)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(35) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(36) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Zs)

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

(37) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Zs)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(38) TRUE

(39) Obligation:

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

U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(40) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(41) Obligation:

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

U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
[] = []
app_in_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_aag(x3)
app_out_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_aag(x1, x2)
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
U6_aag(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_aag(x1, x5)
app_in_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_gga(x1, x2)
app_out_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_gga(x3)
U6_gga(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_gga(x1, x5)
PERM_IN_GA(x1, x2) = PERM_IN_GA(x1)
U3_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_GA(x4)
U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U4_GA(x2, x4)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(42) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(43) Obligation:

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

U3_GA(app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s))) → U4_GA(X, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s))
U4_GA(X, app_out_gga(Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs) → U3_GA(app_in_aag(Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app_in_gga([], X) → app_out_gga(X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys) → U6_gga(X, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys))
app_in_aag(X) → app_out_aag([], X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, app_in_aag(Zs))
U6_gga(X, app_out_gga(Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Zs))
U6_aag(X, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app_in_gga(x0, x1)
app_in_aag(x0)
U6_gga(x0, x1)
U6_aag(x0, x1)

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

(44) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

U3_GA(app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s))) → U4_GA(X, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s))
U4_GA(X, app_out_gga(Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs) → U3_GA(app_in_aag(Xs))

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(.(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + x₁ + x₂
POL(PERM_IN_GA(x₁)) = 1 + 2·x₁
POL(U3_GA(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(U4_GA(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + x₁ + 2·x₂
POL(U6_aag(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + x₁ + x₂
POL(U6_gga(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + x₁ + x₂
POL([]) = 0
POL(app_in_aag(x₁)) = x₁
POL(app_in_gga(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(app_out_aag(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(app_out_gga(x₁)) = x₁

(45) Obligation:

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

app_in_gga([], X) → app_out_gga(X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys) → U6_gga(X, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys))
app_in_aag(X) → app_out_aag([], X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, app_in_aag(Zs))
U6_gga(X, app_out_gga(Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Zs))
U6_aag(X, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app_in_gga(x0, x1)
app_in_aag(x0)
U6_gga(x0, x1)
U6_aag(x0, x1)

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

(46) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(47) TRUE

(48) PrologToPiTRSProof (SOUND transformation)

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

Infinitary Constructor Rewriting Termination of PiTRS implies Termination of Prolog

(49) Obligation:

Pi-finite rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(50) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LOPSTR] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Pi DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → PERM_IN_GA(Xs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → APP_IN_AAG(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_AAG(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → APP_IN_GGA(X1s, X2s, Zs)
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_GGA(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_GA(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_GA(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → ORDERED_IN_G(Ys)
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → LESS_IN_GG(X, s(Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_GG(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_G(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
ss_in_ga(x1, x2) = ss_in_ga(x1)
U1_ga(x1, x2, x3) = U1_ga(x1, x3)
perm_in_ga(x1, x2) = perm_in_ga(x1)
[] = []
perm_out_ga(x1, x2) = perm_out_ga(x1, x2)
U3_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_ga(x1, x4)
app_in_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_aag(x3)
app_out_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_aag(x1, x2, x3)
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
U6_aag(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_aag(x1, x4, x5)
U4_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U4_ga(x1, x2, x4)
app_in_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_gga(x1, x2)
app_out_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)
U6_gga(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_gga(x1, x2, x3, x5)
U5_ga(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U5_ga(x1, x2, x4)
U2_ga(x1, x2, x3) = U2_ga(x1, x2, x3)
ordered_in_g(x1) = ordered_in_g(x1)
ordered_out_g(x1) = ordered_out_g(x1)
U7_g(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U7_g(x1, x2, x3, x4)
less_in_gg(x1, x2) = less_in_gg(x1, x2)
0 = 0
s(x1) = s(x1)
less_out_gg(x1, x2) = less_out_gg(x1, x2)
U9_gg(x1, x2, x3) = U9_gg(x1, x2, x3)
U8_g(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U8_g(x1, x2, x3, x4)
ss_out_ga(x1, x2) = ss_out_ga(x1, x2)
SS_IN_GA(x1, x2) = SS_IN_GA(x1)
U1_GA(x1, x2, x3) = U1_GA(x1, x3)
PERM_IN_GA(x1, x2) = PERM_IN_GA(x1)
U3_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_GA(x1, x4)
APP_IN_AAG(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_AAG(x3)
U6_AAG(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_AAG(x1, x4, x5)
U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U4_GA(x1, x2, x4)
APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2)
U6_GGA(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_GGA(x1, x2, x3, x5)
U5_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U5_GA(x1, x2, x4)
U2_GA(x1, x2, x3) = U2_GA(x1, x2, x3)
ORDERED_IN_G(x1) = ORDERED_IN_G(x1)
U7_G(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U7_G(x1, x2, x3, x4)
LESS_IN_GG(x1, x2) = LESS_IN_GG(x1, x2)
U9_GG(x1, x2, x3) = U9_GG(x1, x2, x3)
U8_G(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U8_G(x1, x2, x3, x4)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(51) Obligation:

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

SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
SS_IN_GA(Xs, Ys) → PERM_IN_GA(Xs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → APP_IN_AAG(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_AAG(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → APP_IN_GGA(X1s, X2s, Zs)
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_GGA(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_GA(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_GA(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
U1_GA(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → ORDERED_IN_G(Ys)
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → LESS_IN_GG(X, s(Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_GG(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_G(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(52) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LOPSTR] contains 5 SCCs with 12 less nodes.

(53) Complex Obligation (AND)

(54) Obligation:

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

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(55) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(56) Obligation:

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

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)

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

(57) PiDPToQDPProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(58) Obligation:

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

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)

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

(59) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

LESS_IN_GG(s(X), s(Y)) → LESS_IN_GG(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

(60) TRUE

(61) Obligation:

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

U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(62) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(63) Obligation:

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

U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))

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

(64) PiDPToQDPProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(65) Obligation:

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

U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))
ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

less_in_gg(x0, x1)
U9_gg(x0, x1, x2)

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

(66) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

ORDERED_IN_G(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(.(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + 2·x₁ + x₂
POL(0) = 0
POL(ORDERED_IN_G(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(U7_G(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 2 + x₁ + 2·x₂ + 2·x₃ + x₄
POL(U9_gg(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 2·x₁ + x₂ + x₃
POL(less_in_gg(x₁, x₂)) = 2·x₁ + x₂
POL(less_out_gg(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(s(x₁)) = 2·x₁

(67) Obligation:

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

U7_G(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → ORDERED_IN_G(.(Y, Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

less_in_gg(x0, x1)
U9_gg(x0, x1, x2)

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

(68) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(69) TRUE

(70) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(71) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(72) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys, Zs)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_GGA(x1, x2)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(73) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(74) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys)

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

(75) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

APP_IN_GGA(.(X, Xs), Ys) → APP_IN_GGA(Xs, Ys)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

(76) TRUE

(77) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(78) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(79) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Xs, Ys, Zs)

R is empty.
The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
APP_IN_AAG(x1, x2, x3) = APP_IN_AAG(x3)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(80) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(81) Obligation:

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

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Zs)

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

(82) QDPSizeChangeProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

By using the subterm criterion [SUBTERM_CRITERION] together with the size-change analysis [AAECC05] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

APP_IN_AAG(.(X, Zs)) → APP_IN_AAG(Zs)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

(83) TRUE

(84) Obligation:

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

U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ss_in_ga(Xs, Ys) → U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_in_ga(Xs, Ys))
perm_in_ga([], []) → perm_out_ga([], [])
perm_in_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U3_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U4_ga(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_in_ga(Zs, Ys))
U5_ga(Xs, X, Ys, perm_out_ga(Zs, Ys)) → perm_out_ga(Xs, .(X, Ys))
U1_ga(Xs, Ys, perm_out_ga(Xs, Ys)) → U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_in_g(Ys))
ordered_in_g([]) → ordered_out_g([])
ordered_in_g(.(X1, [])) → ordered_out_g(.(X1, []))
ordered_in_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs))) → U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_in_gg(X, s(Y)))
less_in_gg(0, s(X2)) → less_out_gg(0, s(X2))
less_in_gg(s(X), s(Y)) → U9_gg(X, Y, less_in_gg(X, Y))
U9_gg(X, Y, less_out_gg(X, Y)) → less_out_gg(s(X), s(Y))
U7_g(X, Y, Xs, less_out_gg(X, s(Y))) → U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_in_g(.(Y, Xs)))
U8_g(X, Y, Xs, ordered_out_g(.(Y, Xs))) → ordered_out_g(.(X, .(Y, Xs)))
U2_ga(Xs, Ys, ordered_out_g(Ys)) → ss_out_ga(Xs, Ys)

(85) UsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

For (infinitary) constructor rewriting [LOPSTR] we can delete all non-usable rules from R.

(86) Obligation:

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

U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs))
U4_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs, Ys)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs, .(X, Ys)) → U3_GA(Xs, X, Ys, app_in_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app_in_gga([], X, X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs))
app_in_aag([], X, X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_in_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Xs, Ys, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))

The argument filtering Pi contains the following mapping:
[] = []
app_in_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_aag(x3)
app_out_aag(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_aag(x1, x2, x3)
.(x1, x2) = .(x1, x2)
U6_aag(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_aag(x1, x4, x5)
app_in_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_in_gga(x1, x2)
app_out_gga(x1, x2, x3) = app_out_gga(x1, x2, x3)
U6_gga(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) = U6_gga(x1, x2, x3, x5)
PERM_IN_GA(x1, x2) = PERM_IN_GA(x1)
U3_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U3_GA(x1, x4)
U4_GA(x1, x2, x3, x4) = U4_GA(x1, x2, x4)

We have to consider all (P,R,Pi)-chains

(87) PiDPToQDPProof (SOUND transformation)

Transforming (infinitary) constructor rewriting Pi-DP problem [LOPSTR] into ordinary QDP problem [LPAR04] by application of Pi.

(88) Obligation:

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

U3_GA(Xs, app_out_aag(X1s, .(X, X2s), Xs)) → U4_GA(Xs, X, app_in_gga(X1s, X2s))
U4_GA(Xs, X, app_out_gga(X1s, X2s, Zs)) → PERM_IN_GA(Zs)
PERM_IN_GA(Xs) → U3_GA(Xs, app_in_aag(Xs))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app_in_gga([], X) → app_out_gga([], X, X)
app_in_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys) → U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, app_in_gga(Xs, Ys))
app_in_aag(X) → app_out_aag([], X, X)
app_in_aag(.(X, Zs)) → U6_aag(X, Zs, app_in_aag(Zs))
U6_gga(X, Xs, Ys, app_out_gga(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_gga(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))
U6_aag(X, Zs, app_out_aag(Xs, Ys, Zs)) → app_out_aag(.(X, Xs), Ys, .(X, Zs))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app_in_gga(x0, x1)
app_in_aag(x0)
U6_gga(x0, x1, x2, x3)
U6_aag(x0, x1, x2)

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