Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpKJCkx2/Ex3_3_25_Bor03

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:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

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:

ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → APP(X1, active(X2))
FROM(mark(X)) → FROM(X)
APP(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → CONS(active(X1), X2)
APP(X1, mark(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(prefix(L)) → CONS(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L)))
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → PREFIX(active(X))
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → CONS(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS))
ACTIVE(prefix(L)) → ZWADR(L, prefix(L))
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ZWADR(X1, mark(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
PROPER(from(X)) → FROM(proper(X))
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
PROPER(s(X)) → S(proper(X))
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → APP(active(X1), X2)
ZWADR(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ZWADR(active(X1), X2)
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PREFIX(proper(X))
ACTIVE(s(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PROPER(X)
ZWADR(mark(X1), X2) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
FROM(ok(X)) → FROM(X)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → FROM(s(X))
S(ok(X)) → S(X)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ZWADR(proper(X1), proper(X2))
CONS(mark(X1), X2) → CONS(X1, X2)
PREFIX(ok(X)) → PREFIX(X)
ACTIVE(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → CONS(X, app(XS, YS))
TOP(mark(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
TOP(ok(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
PREFIX(mark(X)) → PREFIX(X)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → APP(proper(X1), proper(X2))
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(s(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(from(X)) → PROPER(X)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
S(mark(X)) → S(X)
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → CONS(X, nil)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → CONS(proper(X1), proper(X2))
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → S(X)
ACTIVE(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → APP(XS, YS)
APP(mark(X1), X2) → APP(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → APP(Y, cons(X, nil))
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ZWADR(X1, active(X2))
ACTIVE(from(X)) → FROM(active(X))
ACTIVE(from(X)) → CONS(X, from(s(X)))
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → ZWADR(XS, YS)
ACTIVE(s(X)) → S(active(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

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:

ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → APP(X1, active(X2))
FROM(mark(X)) → FROM(X)
APP(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → CONS(active(X1), X2)
APP(X1, mark(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(prefix(L)) → CONS(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L)))
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → PREFIX(active(X))
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → CONS(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS))
ACTIVE(prefix(L)) → ZWADR(L, prefix(L))
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ZWADR(X1, mark(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
PROPER(from(X)) → FROM(proper(X))
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
PROPER(s(X)) → S(proper(X))
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → APP(active(X1), X2)
ZWADR(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ZWADR(active(X1), X2)
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PREFIX(proper(X))
ACTIVE(s(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PROPER(X)
ZWADR(mark(X1), X2) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
FROM(ok(X)) → FROM(X)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → FROM(s(X))
S(ok(X)) → S(X)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ZWADR(proper(X1), proper(X2))
CONS(mark(X1), X2) → CONS(X1, X2)
PREFIX(ok(X)) → PREFIX(X)
ACTIVE(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → CONS(X, app(XS, YS))
TOP(mark(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
TOP(ok(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
PREFIX(mark(X)) → PREFIX(X)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → APP(proper(X1), proper(X2))
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(s(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(from(X)) → PROPER(X)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
S(mark(X)) → S(X)
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → CONS(X, nil)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → CONS(proper(X1), proper(X2))
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → S(X)
ACTIVE(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → APP(XS, YS)
APP(mark(X1), X2) → APP(X1, X2)
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → APP(Y, cons(X, nil))
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ZWADR(X1, active(X2))
ACTIVE(from(X)) → FROM(active(X))
ACTIVE(from(X)) → CONS(X, from(s(X)))
ACTIVE(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → ZWADR(XS, YS)
ACTIVE(s(X)) → S(active(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 9 SCCs with 27 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PREFIX(ok(X)) → PREFIX(X)
PREFIX(mark(X)) → PREFIX(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

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

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

PREFIX(ok(X)) → PREFIX(X)
PREFIX(mark(X)) → PREFIX(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:

PREFIX(ok(X)) → PREFIX(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PREFIX(mark(X)) → PREFIX(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

ZWADR(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
ZWADR(mark(X1), X2) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
ZWADR(X1, mark(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

ZWADR(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
ZWADR(mark(X1), X2) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
ZWADR(X1, mark(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)

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

ZWADR(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
ZWADR(mark(X1), X2) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
ZWADR(X1, mark(X2)) → ZWADR(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

S(ok(X)) → S(X)
S(mark(X)) → S(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

S(ok(X)) → S(X)
S(mark(X)) → S(X)

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

S(ok(X)) → S(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
S(mark(X)) → S(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

FROM(mark(X)) → FROM(X)
FROM(ok(X)) → FROM(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

FROM(mark(X)) → FROM(X)
FROM(ok(X)) → FROM(X)

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

FROM(mark(X)) → FROM(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
FROM(ok(X)) → FROM(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

CONS(mark(X1), X2) → CONS(X1, X2)
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

CONS(mark(X1), X2) → CONS(X1, X2)
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)

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

CONS(mark(X1), X2) → CONS(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
CONS(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → CONS(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

APP(mark(X1), X2) → APP(X1, X2)
APP(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
APP(X1, mark(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

APP(mark(X1), X2) → APP(X1, X2)
APP(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
APP(X1, mark(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)

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

APP(mark(X1), X2) → APP(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2
APP(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
APP(X1, mark(X2)) → APP(X1, X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(s(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(from(X)) → PROPER(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(s(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(from(X)) → PROPER(X)
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PROPER(X)

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

PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(s(X)) → PROPER(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(zWadr(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(cons(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(app(X1, X2)) → PROPER(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(prefix(X)) → PROPER(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
PROPER(from(X)) → PROPER(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

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

ACTIVE(s(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → ACTIVE(X)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

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

ACTIVE(s(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(from(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → ACTIVE(X)

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

ACTIVE(s(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(cons(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(zWadr(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(from(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X1)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(app(X1, X2)) → ACTIVE(X2)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1
ACTIVE(prefix(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

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

TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the usable rules with reduction pair processor [15] with a polynomial ordering [25], all dependency pairs and the corresponding usable rules [17] can be oriented non-strictly. All non-usable rules are removed, and those dependency pairs and usable rules that have been oriented strictly or contain non-usable symbols in their left-hand side are removed as well.

No dependency pairs are removed.

No rules are removed from R.

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(TOP(x₁)) = x₁
POL(active(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(app(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(from(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(mark(x₁)) = x₁
POL(nil) = 0
POL(ok(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(prefix(x₁)) = x₁
POL(proper(x₁)) = x₁
POL(s(x₁)) = x₁
POL(zWadr(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))

Q is empty.
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.

TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
TOP(x1) = TOP(x1)
mark(x1) = mark(x1)
proper(x1) = x1
ok(x1) = x1
active(x1) = x1
prefix(x1) = prefix(x1)
zWadr(x1, x2) = zWadr(x1, x2)
s(x1) = s(x1)
from(x1) = from(x1)
app(x1, x2) = app(x1, x2)
cons(x1, x2) = x1
nil = nil

Recursive path order with status [2].
Quasi-Precedence:

prefix₁ > zWadr₂ > app₂ > [TOP₁, mark₁]
prefix₁ > zWadr₂ > nil
s₁ > [TOP₁, mark₁]
from₁ > [TOP₁, mark₁]

Status:

prefix₁: [1]
from₁: [1]
mark₁: multiset
app₂: [1,2]
s₁: [1]
TOP₁: [1]
zWadr₂: [1,2]
nil: multiset

The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

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

TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

proper(app(X1, X2)) → app(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(nil) → ok(nil)
proper(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(from(X)) → from(proper(X))
proper(s(X)) → s(proper(X))
proper(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(prefix(X)) → prefix(proper(X))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))
active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))

POL(TOP(x₁)) = x₁
POL(active(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(app(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + 2·x₂
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(from(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(mark(x₁)) = x₁
POL(nil) = 0
POL(ok(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(prefix(x₁)) = 2·x₁
POL(s(x₁)) = x₁
POL(zWadr(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ RuleRemovalProof

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

TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))

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:

TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))

Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R:

active(app(nil, YS)) → mark(YS)
active(app(cons(X, XS), YS)) → mark(cons(X, app(XS, YS)))
active(from(X)) → mark(cons(X, from(s(X))))
active(zWadr(nil, YS)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(XS, nil)) → mark(nil)
active(zWadr(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS))) → mark(cons(app(Y, cons(X, nil)), zWadr(XS, YS)))
active(prefix(L)) → mark(cons(nil, zWadr(L, prefix(L))))
active(app(X1, X2)) → app(X1, active(X2))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(X1, active(X2))
active(prefix(X)) → prefix(active(X))
zWadr(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(zWadr(X1, X2))
from(ok(X)) → ok(from(X))
cons(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(cons(X1, X2))
app(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(app(X1, X2))

Used ordering: POLO with Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(TOP(x₁)) = x₁
POL(active(x₁)) = 1 + 2·x₁
POL(app(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + 2·x₁ + x₂
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂
POL(from(x₁)) = 1 + 2·x₁
POL(mark(x₁)) = x₁
POL(nil) = 0
POL(ok(x₁)) = 2 + 2·x₁
POL(prefix(x₁)) = 2 + 2·x₁
POL(s(x₁)) = x₁
POL(zWadr(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + 2·x₁ + x₂

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ UsableRulesReductionPairsProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ RuleRemovalProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

active(app(X1, X2)) → app(active(X1), X2)
active(cons(X1, X2)) → cons(active(X1), X2)
active(from(X)) → from(active(X))
active(s(X)) → s(active(X))
active(zWadr(X1, X2)) → zWadr(active(X1), X2)
prefix(mark(X)) → mark(prefix(X))
prefix(ok(X)) → ok(prefix(X))
zWadr(mark(X1), X2) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
zWadr(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(zWadr(X1, X2))
s(mark(X)) → mark(s(X))
s(ok(X)) → ok(s(X))
from(mark(X)) → mark(from(X))
cons(mark(X1), X2) → mark(cons(X1, X2))
app(mark(X1), X2) → mark(app(X1, X2))
app(X1, mark(X2)) → mark(app(X1, X2))

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.