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:
g(x, y) → x
g(x, y) → y
f(s(x), y, y) → f(y, x, s(x))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(x, y) → x
g(x, y) → y
f(s(x), y, y) → f(y, x, s(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:
F(s(x), y, y) → F(y, x, s(x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(x, y) → x
g(x, y) → y
f(s(x), y, y) → f(y, x, s(x))
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(s(x), y, y) → F(y, x, s(x))
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(x, y) → x
g(x, y) → y
f(s(x), y, y) → f(y, x, s(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.
F(s(x), y, y) → F(y, x, s(x))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + (4)x_1
POL(F(x1, x2, x3)) = (2)x_1 + (4)x_2 + x_3
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:
none
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
g(x, y) → x
g(x, y) → y
f(s(x), y, y) → f(y, x, s(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.