Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpj-Dg80/enno.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:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

Q is empty.

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [19] we can switch to innermost.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

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

QSORT(add(N, X)) → SPLIT(N, X)
LT(s(X), s(Y)) → LT(X, Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → APPEND(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))
F_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → LT(N, M)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)
F_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → F_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
APPEND(add(N, X), Y) → APPEND(X, Y)
SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → F_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
QSORT(add(N, X)) → F_3(split(N, X), N, X)
SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → SPLIT(N, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

QSORT(add(N, X)) → SPLIT(N, X)
LT(s(X), s(Y)) → LT(X, Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → APPEND(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))
F_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → LT(N, M)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)
F_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → F_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
APPEND(add(N, X), Y) → APPEND(X, Y)
SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → F_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
QSORT(add(N, X)) → F_3(split(N, X), N, X)
SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → SPLIT(N, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

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

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

APPEND(add(N, X), Y) → APPEND(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [15] we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

APPEND(add(N, X), Y) → APPEND(X, Y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

APPEND(add(N, X), Y) → APPEND(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:

APPEND(add(N, X), Y) → APPEND(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

LT(s(X), s(Y)) → LT(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

LT(s(X), s(Y)) → LT(X, Y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

LT(s(X), s(Y)) → LT(X, Y)

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

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

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

SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → SPLIT(N, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

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

SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → SPLIT(N, Y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

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

SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → SPLIT(N, Y)

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

SPLIT(N, add(M, Y)) → SPLIT(N, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)
QSORT(add(N, X)) → F_3(split(N, X), N, X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
append(nil, Y) → Y
append(add(N, X), Y) → add(N, append(X, Y))
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
qsort(nil) → nil
qsort(add(N, X)) → f_3(split(N, X), N, X)
f_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → append(qsort(Y), add(X, qsort(Z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

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

F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)
QSORT(add(N, X)) → F_3(split(N, X), N, X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

append(nil, x0)
append(add(x0, x1), x2)
qsort(nil)
qsort(add(x0, x1))
f_3(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)
QSORT(add(N, X)) → F_3(split(N, X), N, X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

QSORT(add(N, X)) → F_3(split(N, X), N, X)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(0) = 0
POL(F_3(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x₁
POL(QSORT(x₁)) = x₁
POL(add(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₂
POL(f_1(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 1 + x₁
POL(f_2(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄, x₅, x₆)) = 1 + x₅ + x₆
POL(false) = 0
POL(lt(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(nil) = 0
POL(pair(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(s(x₁)) = 0
POL(split(x₁, x₂)) = x₂
POL(true) = 0

The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Y)
F_3(pair(Y, Z), N, X) → QSORT(Z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

split(N, nil) → pair(nil, nil)
split(N, add(M, Y)) → f_1(split(N, Y), N, M, Y)
f_1(pair(X, Z), N, M, Y) → f_2(lt(N, M), N, M, Y, X, Z)
lt(0, s(X)) → true
lt(s(X), 0) → false
lt(s(X), s(Y)) → lt(X, Y)
f_2(true, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(X, add(M, Z))
f_2(false, N, M, Y, X, Z) → pair(add(M, X), Z)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

lt(0, s(x0))
lt(s(x0), 0)
lt(s(x0), s(x1))
split(x0, nil)
split(x0, add(x1, x2))
f_1(pair(x0, x1), x2, x3, x4)
f_2(true, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)
f_2(false, x0, x1, x2, x3, x4)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.