Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could not be shown:

(0) Obligation:

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

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(2) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

G(d, s(x)) → G(d, x)
G(h, s(s(x))) → G(h, x)
DOUBLE(x) → G(d, x)
HALF(x) → G(h, x)
F(s(x), y) → F(half(s(x)), double(y))
F(s(x), y) → HALF(s(x))
F(s(x), y) → DOUBLE(y)
ID(x) → F(x, s(0))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 3 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

G(h, s(s(x))) → G(h, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(6) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

G(h, s(s(x))) → G(h, x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Recursive Path Order [RPO].
Precedence:

s₁ > h > G₂

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(8) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(9) TRUE

(10) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

G(d, s(x)) → G(d, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(11) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

G(d, s(x)) → G(d, x)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Recursive Path Order [RPO].
Precedence:

s₁ > d > G₂

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(12) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.

(13) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(14) TRUE

(15) Obligation:

Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

F(s(x), y) → F(half(s(x)), double(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

g(x, 0) → 0
g(d, s(x)) → s(s(g(d, x)))
g(h, s(0)) → 0
g(h, s(s(x))) → s(g(h, x))
double(x) → g(d, x)
half(x) → g(h, x)
f(s(x), y) → f(half(s(x)), double(y))
f(s(0), y) → y
id(x) → f(x, s(0))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.