Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be proven:
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
Q is empty.
The TRS is non-overlapping. Hence, we can switch to innermost.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
ackin2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
u212(ackout1(x0), x1)
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
U212(ackout1(X), Y) -> ACKIN2(Y, X)
ACKIN2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> ACKIN2(s1(X), Y)
ACKIN2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> U212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
ackin2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
u212(ackout1(x0), x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
U212(ackout1(X), Y) -> ACKIN2(Y, X)
ACKIN2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> ACKIN2(s1(X), Y)
ACKIN2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> U212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
ackin2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
u212(ackout1(x0), x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph contains 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
ACKIN2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> ACKIN2(s1(X), Y)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
ackin2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
u212(ackout1(x0), x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using an argument filtering and a montonic ordering, at least one Dependency Pair of this SCC can be strictly oriented.
ACKIN2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> ACKIN2(s1(X), Y)
Used argument filtering: ACKIN2(x1, x2) = x2
s1(x1) = s1(x1)
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence:
trivial
↳ QTRS
↳ Non-Overlap Check
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ DependencyGraphProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
ackin2(s1(X), s1(Y)) -> u212(ackin2(s1(X), Y), X)
u212(ackout1(X), Y) -> u221(ackin2(Y, X))
The set Q consists of the following terms:
ackin2(s1(x0), s1(x1))
u212(ackout1(x0), x1)
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.