Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

(0) Obligation:

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

a(b(x)) → b(a(x))
a(c(x)) → x

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Recursive Path Order [RPO].
Precedence:

c₁ > [a₁, b₁]

With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

a(c(x)) → x

(2) Obligation:

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

a(b(x)) → b(a(x))

Q is empty.

(3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Recursive Path Order [RPO].
Precedence:

a₁ > b₁

With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

a(b(x)) → b(a(x))

(4) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
R is empty.
Q is empty.

(5) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven.

(6) TRUE