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:

div2(0, y) -> 0
div2(x, y) -> quot3(x, y, y)
quot3(0, s1(y), z) -> 0
quot3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> quot3(x, y, z)
quot3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> s1(div2(x, s1(z)))

Q is empty.


QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

div2(0, y) -> 0
div2(x, y) -> quot3(x, y, y)
quot3(0, s1(y), z) -> 0
quot3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> quot3(x, y, z)
quot3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> s1(div2(x, s1(z)))

Q is empty.

Using Dependency Pairs [1,13] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

QUOT3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> DIV2(x, s1(z))
QUOT3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> QUOT3(x, y, z)
DIV2(x, y) -> QUOT3(x, y, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

div2(0, y) -> 0
div2(x, y) -> quot3(x, y, y)
quot3(0, s1(y), z) -> 0
quot3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> quot3(x, y, z)
quot3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> s1(div2(x, s1(z)))

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
QDP
      ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> DIV2(x, s1(z))
QUOT3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> QUOT3(x, y, z)
DIV2(x, y) -> QUOT3(x, y, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

div2(0, y) -> 0
div2(x, y) -> quot3(x, y, y)
quot3(0, s1(y), z) -> 0
quot3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> quot3(x, y, z)
quot3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> s1(div2(x, s1(z)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


QUOT3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> QUOT3(x, y, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

QUOT3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> DIV2(x, s1(z))
DIV2(x, y) -> QUOT3(x, y, y)
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [21]:

POL(0) = 0   
POL(DIV2(x1, x2)) = x1   
POL(QUOT3(x1, x2, x3)) = x1   
POL(s1(x1)) = 1 + 2·x1   

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPOrderProof
QDP
          ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> DIV2(x, s1(z))
DIV2(x, y) -> QUOT3(x, y, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

div2(0, y) -> 0
div2(x, y) -> quot3(x, y, y)
quot3(0, s1(y), z) -> 0
quot3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> quot3(x, y, z)
quot3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> s1(div2(x, s1(z)))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


QUOT3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> DIV2(x, s1(z))
DIV2(x, y) -> QUOT3(x, y, y)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [21]:

POL(0) = 2   
POL(DIV2(x1, x2)) = 2 + 2·x2   
POL(QUOT3(x1, x2, x3)) = 2·x2   
POL(s1(x1)) = 0   

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPOrderProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDPOrderProof
QDP
              ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

div2(0, y) -> 0
div2(x, y) -> quot3(x, y, y)
quot3(0, s1(y), z) -> 0
quot3(s1(x), s1(y), z) -> quot3(x, y, z)
quot3(x, 0, s1(z)) -> s1(div2(x, s1(z)))

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.