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:

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(x)

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(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:

G(c(h(0))) → G(d(1))
F(f(x)) → F(c(f(x)))
F(f(x)) → F(d(f(x)))
G(h(x)) → G(x)
G(c(1)) → G(d(h(0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(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:

G(c(h(0))) → G(d(1))
F(f(x)) → F(c(f(x)))
F(f(x)) → F(d(f(x)))
G(h(x)) → G(x)
G(c(1)) → G(d(h(0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(x)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 1 SCC with 4 less nodes.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

G(h(x)) → G(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(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.


G(h(x)) → G(x)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(h(x1)) = 1/4 + (7/2)x_1   
POL(G(x1)) = (2)x_1   
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/2.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none



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

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

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(x)

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.