Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmptxgeZY/division.trs

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:

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

Q is empty.

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [19] we can switch to innermost.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))
IFMINUS(false, s(X), Y) → MINUS(X, Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → LE(s(X), Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → IFMINUS(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
LE(s(X), s(Y)) → LE(X, Y)
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → MINUS(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))
IFMINUS(false, s(X), Y) → MINUS(X, Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → LE(s(X), Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → IFMINUS(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
LE(s(X), s(Y)) → LE(X, Y)
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → MINUS(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

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

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

LE(s(X), s(Y)) → LE(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [15] we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

LE(s(X), s(Y)) → LE(X, Y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

LE(s(X), s(Y)) → LE(X, Y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

LE(s(X), s(Y)) → LE(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

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

IFMINUS(false, s(X), Y) → MINUS(X, Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → IFMINUS(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

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

IFMINUS(false, s(X), Y) → MINUS(X, Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → IFMINUS(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
le(0, Y) → true

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

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

IFMINUS(false, s(X), Y) → MINUS(X, Y)
MINUS(s(X), Y) → IFMINUS(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
le(0, Y) → true

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

MINUS(s(X), Y) → IFMINUS(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 >= 2, 2 >= 3
IFMINUS(false, s(X), Y) → MINUS(X, Y)
The graph contains the following edges 2 > 1, 3 >= 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

le(0, Y) → true
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

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

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
le(0, Y) → true

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)
quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

quot(0, s(x0))
quot(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
le(0, Y) → true

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)

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)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

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

POL(0) = 0
POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂)) = x₁
POL(false) = 0
POL(ifMinus(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x₂
POL(le(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = x₁
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁
POL(true) = 0

The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

minus(0, Y) → 0
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

minus(0, Y) → 0
minus(s(X), Y) → ifMinus(le(s(X), Y), s(X), Y)
le(s(X), 0) → false
le(s(X), s(Y)) → le(X, Y)
ifMinus(true, s(X), Y) → 0
ifMinus(false, s(X), Y) → s(minus(X, Y))
le(0, Y) → true

The set Q consists of the following terms:

le(0, x0)
le(s(x0), 0)
le(s(x0), s(x1))
minus(0, x0)
minus(s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(true, s(x0), x1)
ifMinus(false, s(x0), x1)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.