Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be proven:

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

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.


QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.

Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

GE(#, 0(x)) → GE(#, x)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l1)
*1(0(x), y) → 01(*(x, y))
EQ(1(x), 1(y)) → EQ(x, y)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → IF(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
GE(0(x), 1(y)) → NOT(ge(y, x))
LOG(x) → LOG'(x)
LOG'(0(x)) → IF(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → 01(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l3)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, z)
LOG'(1(x)) → LOG'(x)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l2)
LOG'(0(x)) → LOG'(x)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l2, l3)
SUM(nil) → 01(#)
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l1)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
SUM(cons(x, l)) → +1(x, sum(l))
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l2)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → MEM(x, l2)
LOG(x) → -1(log'(x), 1(#))
+1(0(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
GE(0(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
EQ(0(x), #) → EQ(x, #)
EQ(#, 0(y)) → EQ(#, y)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))
GE(1(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
GE(0(x), 1(y)) → GE(y, x)
SUM(cons(x, l)) → SUM(l)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
-1(1(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
+1(0(x), 0(y)) → 01(+(x, y))
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → 01(-(x, y))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → APP(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
LOG'(0(x)) → GE(x, 1(#))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
LOG'(1(x)) → +1(log'(x), 1(#))
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(-(x, y), 1(#))
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
-1(1(x), 1(y)) → 01(-(x, y))
*1(1(x), y) → +1(0(*(x, y)), y)
*1(1(x), y) → 01(*(x, y))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(+(x, y), 1(#))
GE(1(x), 1(y)) → GE(x, y)
LOG'(0(x)) → +1(log'(x), 1(#))
*1(0(x), y) → *1(x, y)
PROD(cons(x, l)) → PROD(l)
-1(1(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → EQ(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → +1(*(x, y), *(x, z))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l1, l3)
+1(0(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → *1(prod(l1), prod(l2))
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → MEM(x, l1)
*1(*(x, y), z) → *1(y, z)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → MEM(x, l)
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → +1(sum(l1), sum(l2))
*1(*(x, y), z) → *1(x, *(y, z))
PROD(cons(x, l)) → *1(x, prod(l))
EQ(0(x), 0(y)) → EQ(x, y)
*1(1(x), y) → *1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

GE(#, 0(x)) → GE(#, x)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l1)
*1(0(x), y) → 01(*(x, y))
EQ(1(x), 1(y)) → EQ(x, y)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → IF(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
GE(0(x), 1(y)) → NOT(ge(y, x))
LOG(x) → LOG'(x)
LOG'(0(x)) → IF(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → 01(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l3)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, z)
LOG'(1(x)) → LOG'(x)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l2)
LOG'(0(x)) → LOG'(x)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l2, l3)
SUM(nil) → 01(#)
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l1)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
SUM(cons(x, l)) → +1(x, sum(l))
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l2)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → MEM(x, l2)
LOG(x) → -1(log'(x), 1(#))
+1(0(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
GE(0(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
EQ(0(x), #) → EQ(x, #)
EQ(#, 0(y)) → EQ(#, y)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))
GE(1(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
GE(0(x), 1(y)) → GE(y, x)
SUM(cons(x, l)) → SUM(l)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
-1(1(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
+1(0(x), 0(y)) → 01(+(x, y))
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → 01(-(x, y))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → APP(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
LOG'(0(x)) → GE(x, 1(#))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
LOG'(1(x)) → +1(log'(x), 1(#))
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(-(x, y), 1(#))
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
-1(1(x), 1(y)) → 01(-(x, y))
*1(1(x), y) → +1(0(*(x, y)), y)
*1(1(x), y) → 01(*(x, y))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(+(x, y), 1(#))
GE(1(x), 1(y)) → GE(x, y)
LOG'(0(x)) → +1(log'(x), 1(#))
*1(0(x), y) → *1(x, y)
PROD(cons(x, l)) → PROD(l)
-1(1(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → EQ(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → +1(*(x, y), *(x, z))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l1, l3)
+1(0(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → *1(prod(l1), prod(l2))
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → MEM(x, l1)
*1(*(x, y), z) → *1(y, z)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → MEM(x, l)
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → +1(sum(l1), sum(l2))
*1(*(x, y), z) → *1(x, *(y, z))
PROD(cons(x, l)) → *1(x, prod(l))
EQ(0(x), 0(y)) → EQ(x, y)
*1(1(x), y) → *1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 14 SCCs with 26 less nodes.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

GE(#, 0(x)) → GE(#, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

GE(#, 0(x)) → GE(#, x)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

GE(0(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
GE(1(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
GE(0(x), 1(y)) → GE(y, x)
GE(1(x), 1(y)) → GE(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

GE(0(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
GE(0(x), 1(y)) → GE(y, x)
GE(1(x), 0(y)) → GE(x, y)
GE(1(x), 1(y)) → GE(x, y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(0(x), #) → EQ(x, #)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(0(x), #) → EQ(x, #)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(#, 0(y)) → EQ(#, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(#, 0(y)) → EQ(#, y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(1(x), 1(y)) → EQ(x, y)
EQ(0(x), 0(y)) → EQ(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(1(x), 1(y)) → EQ(x, y)
EQ(0(x), 0(y)) → EQ(x, y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → MEM(x, l)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → MEM(x, l)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l1, l3)
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l3)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l2, l3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

-1(1(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(1(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(-(x, y), 1(#))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ RuleRemovalProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

-1(1(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(-(x, y), 1(#))
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(1(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
0(#) → #

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the rule removal processor [15] with the following polynomial ordering [25], at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.
Strictly oriented dependency pairs:

-1(1(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(-(x, y), 1(#))
-1(0(x), 1(y)) → -1(x, y)
-1(1(x), 0(y)) → -1(x, y)

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
0(#) → #

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(#) = 0   
POL(-(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(-1(x1, x2)) = 2·x1 + 2·x2   
POL(0(x1)) = 1 + x1   
POL(1(x1)) = 1 + x1   



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ RuleRemovalProof
QDP
                    ↳ PisEmptyProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

+1(0(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(0(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(+(x, y), 1(#))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ RuleRemovalProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

+1(0(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(0(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(+(x, y), 1(#))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
0(#) → #

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the rule removal processor [15] with the following polynomial ordering [25], at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented.
Strictly oriented dependency pairs:

+1(0(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(0(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 0(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(x, y)
+1(1(x), 1(y)) → +1(+(x, y), 1(#))

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
0(#) → #

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(#) = 0   
POL(+(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(+1(x1, x2)) = 2·x1 + 2·x2   
POL(0(x1)) = 1 + x1   
POL(1(x1)) = 1 + x1   



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ RuleRemovalProof
QDP
                    ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l1)
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l2)
SUM(cons(x, l)) → SUM(l)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l1)
SUM(cons(x, l)) → SUM(l)
SUM(app(l1, l2)) → SUM(l2)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP

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

*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, y)
*1(x, +(y, z)) → *1(x, z)
*1(*(x, y), z) → *1(y, z)
*1(*(x, y), z) → *1(x, *(y, z))
*1(0(x), y) → *1(x, y)
*1(1(x), y) → *1(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
          ↳ QDP

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

PROD(cons(x, l)) → PROD(l)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l1)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof
          ↳ QDP

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

PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l1)
PROD(cons(x, l)) → PROD(l)
PROD(app(l1, l2)) → PROD(l2)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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:



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

LOG'(1(x)) → LOG'(x)
LOG'(0(x)) → LOG'(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

0(#) → #
+(x, #) → x
+(#, x) → x
+(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(+(x, y))
+(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(+(x, y))
+(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(+(+(x, y), 1(#)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
-(#, x) → #
-(x, #) → x
-(0(x), 0(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
-(0(x), 1(y)) → 1(-(-(x, y), 1(#)))
-(1(x), 0(y)) → 1(-(x, y))
-(1(x), 1(y)) → 0(-(x, y))
not(true) → false
not(false) → true
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(#, #) → true
eq(#, 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), #) → false
eq(#, 0(y)) → eq(#, y)
eq(0(x), #) → eq(x, #)
eq(1(x), 1(y)) → eq(x, y)
eq(0(x), 1(y)) → false
eq(1(x), 0(y)) → false
eq(0(x), 0(y)) → eq(x, y)
ge(0(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(0(x), 1(y)) → not(ge(y, x))
ge(1(x), 0(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(1(x), 1(y)) → ge(x, y)
ge(x, #) → true
ge(#, 0(x)) → ge(#, x)
ge(#, 1(x)) → false
log(x) → -(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(#) → #
log'(1(x)) → +(log'(x), 1(#))
log'(0(x)) → if(ge(x, 1(#)), +(log'(x), 1(#)), #)
*(#, x) → #
*(0(x), y) → 0(*(x, y))
*(1(x), y) → +(0(*(x, y)), y)
*(*(x, y), z) → *(x, *(y, z))
*(x, +(y, z)) → +(*(x, y), *(x, z))
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
sum(nil) → 0(#)
sum(cons(x, l)) → +(x, sum(l))
sum(app(l1, l2)) → +(sum(l1), sum(l2))
prod(nil) → 1(#)
prod(cons(x, l)) → *(x, prod(l))
prod(app(l1, l2)) → *(prod(l1), prod(l2))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → if(eq(x, y), true, mem(x, l))
inter(x, nil) → nil
inter(nil, x) → nil
inter(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
inter(l1, app(l2, l3)) → app(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
inter(cons(x, l1), l2) → ifinter(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
inter(l1, cons(x, l2)) → ifinter(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
ifinter(true, x, l1, l2) → cons(x, inter(l1, l2))
ifinter(false, x, l1, l2) → inter(l1, l2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ UsableRulesProof
QDP
                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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

LOG'(1(x)) → LOG'(x)
LOG'(0(x)) → LOG'(x)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] 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: