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:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

and₂ > activate₁ > s₁
tt > s₁
x₂ > plus₂ > s₁
x₂ > 0 > s₁

Status:

and₂: [2,1]
tt: multiset
activate₁: [1]
plus₂: [1,2]
0: multiset
s₁: [1]
x₂: [1,2]

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

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → 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