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:

p(s(x)) → x
s(p(x)) → x
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(p(x), y) → p(+(x, y))
minus(0) → 0
minus(s(x)) → p(minus(x))
minus(p(x)) → s(minus(x))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
*(p(x), y) → +(*(x, y), minus(y))

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

[minus₁, *₂] > +₂ > s₁ > p₁
[minus₁, *₂] > 0

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

p(s(x)) → x
s(p(x)) → x
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(p(x), y) → p(+(x, y))
minus(0) → 0
minus(s(x)) → p(minus(x))
minus(p(x)) → s(minus(x))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
*(p(x), y) → +(*(x, y), minus(y))

(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