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:
p3(m, n, s1(r)) -> p3(m, r, n)
p3(m, s1(n), 0) -> p3(0, n, m)
p3(m, 0, 0) -> m
Q is empty.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
p3(m, n, s1(r)) -> p3(m, r, n)
p3(m, s1(n), 0) -> p3(0, n, m)
p3(m, 0, 0) -> m
Q is empty.
Using Dependency Pairs [1,13] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
P3(m, n, s1(r)) -> P3(m, r, n)
P3(m, s1(n), 0) -> P3(0, n, m)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
p3(m, n, s1(r)) -> p3(m, r, n)
p3(m, s1(n), 0) -> p3(0, n, m)
p3(m, 0, 0) -> m
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:
P3(m, n, s1(r)) -> P3(m, r, n)
P3(m, s1(n), 0) -> P3(0, n, m)
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
p3(m, n, s1(r)) -> p3(m, r, n)
p3(m, s1(n), 0) -> p3(0, n, m)
p3(m, 0, 0) -> m
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [13].
The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.
P3(m, n, s1(r)) -> P3(m, r, n)
P3(m, s1(n), 0) -> P3(0, n, m)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [21]:
POL(0) = 2
POL(P3(x1, x2, x3)) = x1 + 2·x2 + x3
POL(s1(x1)) = 1 + 2·x1
The following usable rules [14] were oriented:
none
↳ QTRS
↳ DependencyPairsProof
↳ QDP
↳ QDPOrderProof
↳ QDP
↳ PisEmptyProof
Q DP problem:
P is empty.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
p3(m, n, s1(r)) -> p3(m, r, n)
p3(m, s1(n), 0) -> p3(0, n, m)
p3(m, 0, 0) -> m
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.