Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpyIWW62/002.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:

app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(filter, f), ys)

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(filter, f), ys)

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:

app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(filter, f), ys)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))

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(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filtersub, app(f, y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(filter, f), ys)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))

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:

APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filtersub, app(f, y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(filter, f), ys)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 1 SCC with 6 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(filter, f), nil) → nil
app(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → app(app(filter, f), ys)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))

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

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ UsableRulesProof

                ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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

APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)

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

app(app(filter, x0), nil)
app(app(filter, x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, true), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))
app(app(app(filtersub, false), x0), app(app(cons, x1), x2))

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(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2
APP(app(app(filtersub, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 2