Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpdsxXOL/logarquot.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:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

LOG(s(s(X))) → QUOT(X, s(s(0)))
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(min(X, Y), s(Y))
LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))
MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

LOG(s(s(X))) → QUOT(X, s(s(0)))
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(min(X, Y), s(Y))
LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))
MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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.

MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)

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

POL(MIN(x₁, x₂)) = (3)x_2
POL(s(x₁)) = 4 + (2)x_1

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 12.
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:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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)) → QUOT(min(X, Y), s(Y))

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

POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂)) = (3)x_1
POL(s(x₁)) = 3 + (3)x_1
POL(min(x₁, x₂)) = 2 + (2)x_1
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 3.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)

↳ 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:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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.

LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))

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

POL(LOG(x₁)) = (4)x_1
POL(quot(x₁, x₂)) = (2)x_1
POL(s(x₁)) = 4 + (2)x_1
POL(min(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x_1
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 32.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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.