Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpk9RVsb/2.52.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:

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

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 4 SCCs with 1 less node.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

F(0, s(0), s(s(z))) → F(0, s(0), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

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

POL(s(x₁)) = 1/4 + (2)x_1
POL(F(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (1/2)x_3
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 3/8.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

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

          ↳ QDP

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

F(0, s(s(y)), s(0)) → F(0, y, s(0))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

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

POL(s(x₁)) = 1/4 + (4)x_1
POL(F(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (1/4)x_2
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 5/16.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

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

          ↳ QDP

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

F(0, s(s(y)), s(s(z))) → F(0, y, f(0, s(s(y)), s(z)))
F(0, s(s(y)), s(s(z))) → F(0, s(s(y)), s(z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

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

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(f(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 0
POL(s(x₁)) = 1/4 + (4)x_1
POL(F(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (4)x_2
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 5.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

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

POL(s(x₁)) = 4 + (4)x_1
POL(F(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (4)x_3
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 64.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

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

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

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

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

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(f(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = 0
POL(s(x₁)) = 1/4 + (2)x_1
POL(F(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x_1
POL(0) = 0

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/4.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

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

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

POL(s(x₁)) = 1/4 + (2)x_1
POL(F(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = (1/4)x_3

The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 1/16.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

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