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:

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

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:

MINUS(x, s(y)) → MINUS(x, p(s(y)))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → P(minus(x, p(s(y))))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → IF(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → P(s(y))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → LE(x, s(y))
LE(s(x), s(y)) → LE(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

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:

MINUS(x, s(y)) → MINUS(x, p(s(y)))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → P(minus(x, p(s(y))))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → IF(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → P(s(y))
MINUS(x, s(y)) → LE(x, s(y))
LE(s(x), s(y)) → LE(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 2 SCCs with 4 less nodes.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ QDPOrderProof
          ↳ 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:

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

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.


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

POL(s(x1)) = 1/2 + (4)x_1   
POL(LE(x1, x2)) = (1/2)x_1   
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
            ↳ QDPOrderProof
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ PisEmptyProof
          ↳ QDP

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

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

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

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

MINUS(x, s(y)) → MINUS(x, p(s(y)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

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.


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

POL(MINUS(x1, x2)) = (4)x_2   
POL(s(x1)) = 1/4 + (4)x_1   
POL(p(x1)) = (1/4)x_1   
The value of delta used in the strict ordering is 3/4.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

p(s(x)) → x



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ DependencyGraphProof
        ↳ AND
          ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDP
            ↳ QDPOrderProof
              ↳ QDP
                ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

p(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x
le(0, y) → true
le(s(x), 0) → false
le(s(x), s(y)) → le(x, y)
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(x, s(y)) → if(le(x, s(y)), 0, p(minus(x, p(s(y)))))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y

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.