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(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

[a₁, d₁, v₁, w₁] > u₁ > [c₁, b₁]

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

a(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

(2) Obligation:

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

(3) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(4) TRUE