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(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))

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:

F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, 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:

F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))

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.


F(x, y, s(z)) → F(0, 1, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(s(x1)) = 4 + (2)x_1   
POL(F(x1, x2, x3)) = (4)x_3   
POL(0) = 11/4   
POL(1) = 0   
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 16.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none



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

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

F(0, 1, x) → F(s(x), x, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0, 1, x) → f(s(x), x, x)
f(x, y, s(z)) → s(f(0, 1, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.