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:

f(f(a)) → f(g(n__f(n__a)))
f(X) → n__f(X)
a → n__a
activate(n__f(X)) → f(activate(X))
activate(n__a) → a
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

[a, n_a, activate₁] > f₁ > g₁ > n_f1

Status:

f₁: [1]
a: []
g₁: [1]
n_f1: [1]
activate₁: [1]
n_a: []

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

f(f(a)) → f(g(n__f(n__a)))
f(X) → n__f(X)
activate(n__f(X)) → f(activate(X))
activate(n__a) → a
activate(X) → X

(2) Obligation:

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

a → n__a

Q is empty.

(3) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

a > n_a

Status:

a: []
n_a: []

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

a → n__a

(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