Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmp3FqmQt/intersect.trs

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:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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:

APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l1, app(l2, l3))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → APP(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → EQ(x, y)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → MEM(x, l2)
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l2, l3)
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l2)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l1, l3)
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l3)
IFMEM(false, x, l) → MEM(x, l)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → MEM(x, l1)
EQ(s(x), s(y)) → EQ(x, y)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l2, l3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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:

APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l1, app(l2, l3))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → APP(inter(l1, l2), inter(l1, l3))
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → EQ(x, y)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → MEM(x, l2)
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l2, l3)
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(inter(l1, l3), inter(l2, l3))
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l2)
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l1, l3)
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l3)
IFMEM(false, x, l) → MEM(x, l)
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → MEM(x, l1)
EQ(s(x), s(y)) → EQ(x, y)
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l2, l3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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 4 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l1, app(l2, l3))
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l2, l3)
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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

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

APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l1, app(l2, l3))
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l2, l3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))

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:

APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l1, app(l2, l3))
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
APP(app(l1, l2), l3) → APP(l2, l3)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
APP(cons(x, l1), l2) → APP(l1, l2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(s(x), s(y)) → EQ(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

EQ(s(x), s(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:

EQ(s(x), s(y)) → EQ(x, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

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

MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
IFMEM(false, x, l) → MEM(x, l)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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)

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

IFMEM(false, x, l) → MEM(x, l)
The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 1, 3 >= 2
MEM(x, cons(y, l)) → IFMEM(eq(x, y), x, l)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 2, 2 > 3

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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:

if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(x)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
app(nil, l) → l
app(cons(x, l1), l2) → cons(x, app(l1, l2))
app(app(l1, l2), l3) → app(l1, app(l2, l3))
mem(x, nil) → false
mem(x, cons(y, l)) → ifmem(eq(x, y), x, l)
ifmem(true, x, l) → true
ifmem(false, x, l) → 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)

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

INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l2, l3)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
INTER(app(l1, l2), l3) → INTER(l1, l3)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2
INTER(l1, app(l2, l3)) → INTER(l1, l3)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2
INTER(cons(x, l1), l2) → IFINTER(mem(x, l2), x, l1, l2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 2, 1 > 3, 2 >= 4
INTER(l1, cons(x, l2)) → IFINTER(mem(x, l1), x, l2, l1)
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2, 2 > 3, 1 >= 4
IFINTER(true, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
The graph contains the following edges 3 >= 1, 4 >= 2
IFINTER(false, x, l1, l2) → INTER(l1, l2)
The graph contains the following edges 3 >= 1, 4 >= 2