Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpnE__nr/IJCAR

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:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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:

TIMES(s(x), y) → PLUS(y, times(x, y))
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → TIMES(y, z)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))
PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

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:

TIMES(s(x), y) → PLUS(y, times(x, y))
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → TIMES(y, z)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))
PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 3 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(PLUS(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_1
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + (4)x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 4.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.

TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(TIMES(x₁, x₂)) = (4)x_1
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + (4)x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 4.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

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

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(plus(x₁, x₂)) = 4 + (3)x_1 + x_2
POL(div(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (4)x_1 + (3)x_2
POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 2 + x_1
POL(DIV(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + x_1
POL(times(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (3)x_2
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x_1
POL(0) = 3

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (3)x_2
POL(DIV(x₁, x₂)) = 3 + (4)x_2
POL(s(x₁)) = 0
POL(0) = 2

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 3.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, 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.