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:

*(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *(minus(*(y, y)), x)

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

*(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *(minus(*(y, y)), 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:

*1(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *1(y, y)
*1(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *1(minus(*(y, y)), x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

*(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *(minus(*(y, y)), 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:

*1(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *1(y, y)
*1(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *1(minus(*(y, y)), x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

*(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *(minus(*(y, y)), 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.


*1(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *1(y, y)
*1(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *1(minus(*(y, y)), x)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25,35]:

POL(*1(x1, x2)) = (2)x_1 + x_2   
POL(minus(x1)) = 1   
POL(*(x1, x2)) = 4 + x_1 + (4)x_2   
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 3.
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:

*(x, *(minus(y), y)) → *(minus(*(y, y)), 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.