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:

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

Q is empty.

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

MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> A__F2(mark1(X1), X2)
A__F2(g1(X), Y) -> MARK1(X)
A__F2(g1(X), Y) -> A__F2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
MARK1(g1(X)) -> MARK1(X)
MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> MARK1(X1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof

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

MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> A__F2(mark1(X1), X2)
A__F2(g1(X), Y) -> MARK1(X)
A__F2(g1(X), Y) -> A__F2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
MARK1(g1(X)) -> MARK1(X)
MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> MARK1(X1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

Q is empty.
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.

A__F2(g1(X), Y) -> MARK1(X)
A__F2(g1(X), Y) -> A__F2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
MARK1(g1(X)) -> MARK1(X)
Used argument filtering: MARK1(x1)  =  x1
f2(x1, x2)  =  x1
A__F2(x1, x2)  =  x1
mark1(x1)  =  x1
g1(x1)  =  g1(x1)
a__f2(x1, x2)  =  x1
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence: trivial 


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> A__F2(mark1(X1), X2)
MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> MARK1(X1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof

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

MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> MARK1(X1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

Q is empty.
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.

MARK1(f2(X1, X2)) -> MARK1(X1)
Used argument filtering: MARK1(x1)  =  x1
f2(x1, x2)  =  f1(x1)
Used ordering: Quasi Precedence: trivial 


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDPAfsSolverProof
                ↳ QDP
                  ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

a__f2(g1(X), Y) -> a__f2(mark1(X), f2(g1(X), Y))
mark1(f2(X1, X2)) -> a__f2(mark1(X1), X2)
mark1(g1(X)) -> g1(mark1(X))
a__f2(X1, X2) -> f2(X1, X2)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.