Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpHffkoN/016.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(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

app(app(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

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(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

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(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(neq, x)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
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(filter, f)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f)
APP(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(neq, x), y)
NONZERO → APP(neq, 0)
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)
NONZERO → APP(filter, app(neq, 0))
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filtersub, app(f, y))
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(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

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(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(neq, x)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(f, y)
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(filter, f)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f)
APP(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(neq, x), y)
NONZERO → APP(neq, 0)
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)
NONZERO → APP(filter, app(neq, 0))
APP(app(app(filtersub, true), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filter, f)
APP(app(filter, f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(filtersub, app(f, y))
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(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 2 SCCs with 8 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(neq, x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

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

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

APP(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(neq, x), y)

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

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

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.

nonzero

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ ATransformationProof

              ↳ QDP

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

APP(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → APP(app(neq, x), y)

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

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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.
We have applied the A-Transformation [17] to get from an applicative problem to a standard problem.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ ATransformationProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

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

neq1(s(x), s(y)) → neq1(x, y)

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

neq(0, 0)
neq(0, s(x0))
neq(s(x0), 0)
neq(s(x0), s(x1))
filter(x0, nil)
filter(x0, cons(x1, x2))
filtersub(true, x0, cons(x1, x2))
filtersub(false, x0, cons(x1, x2))

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.

neq(0, 0)
neq(0, s(x0))
neq(s(x0), 0)
neq(s(x0), s(x1))
filter(x0, nil)
filter(x0, cons(x1, x2))
filtersub(true, x0, cons(x1, x2))
filtersub(false, x0, cons(x1, x2))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ ATransformationProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ QReductionProof

                              ↳ QDP

                                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

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

neq1(s(x), s(y)) → neq1(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:

neq1(s(x), s(y)) → neq1(x, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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)
nonzero → app(filter, app(neq, 0))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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, 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(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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))
nonzero

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.

nonzero

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

app(app(neq, 0), 0) → false
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, y)) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), 0) → true
app(app(neq, app(s, x)), app(s, y)) → app(app(neq, x), y)
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, 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(cons, y), app(app(filter, f), ys))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

app(app(neq, 0), 0)
app(app(neq, 0), app(s, x0))
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), 0)
app(app(neq, app(s, x0)), app(s, x1))
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(app(app(filtersub, app(f, y)), f), app(app(cons, y), ys))
The graph contains the following edges 2 >= 2
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, false), f), app(app(cons, y), ys)) → APP(app(filter, f), ys)
The graph contains the following edges 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