Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/Thiemanntower.trs

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:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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:

TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> P₁(s₁(x))
TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> TOWERITER₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))
PLUS₂(s₁(x), y) -> PLUS₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)
PLUS₂(s₁(x), y) -> P₁(s₁(x))
P₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> P₁(s₁(x))
TOWER₂(x, y) -> TOWERITER₃(x, y, s₁(0))
TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> TIMES₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)
TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> P₁(s₁(x))
TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> EXP₂(y, z)
EXP₂(x, s₁(y)) -> EXP₂(x, y)
EXP₂(x, s₁(y)) -> TIMES₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> PLUS₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> P₁(s₁(x))
TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> TOWERITER₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))
PLUS₂(s₁(x), y) -> PLUS₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)
PLUS₂(s₁(x), y) -> P₁(s₁(x))
P₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> P₁(s₁(x))
TOWER₂(x, y) -> TOWERITER₃(x, y, s₁(0))
TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> TIMES₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)
TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> P₁(s₁(x))
TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> EXP₂(y, z)
EXP₂(x, s₁(y)) -> EXP₂(x, y)
EXP₂(x, s₁(y)) -> TIMES₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> PLUS₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 5 SCCs with 7 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

P₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> P₁(s₁(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

P₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> P₁(s₁(x))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [17,21] with Interpretation:

POL( P₁(x₁) ) = 2x₁ + 2

POL( s₁(x₁) ) = 3x₁ + 3

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PLUS₂(s₁(x), y) -> PLUS₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

PLUS₂(s₁(x), y) -> PLUS₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [17,21] with Interpretation:

POL( 0 ) = max{0, -3}

POL( s₁(x₁) ) = x₁ + 1

POL( PLUS₂(x₁, x₂) ) = x₁ + 1

POL( p₁(x₁) ) = max{0, x₁ - 1}

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> TIMES₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

TIMES₂(s₁(x), y) -> TIMES₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [17,21] with Interpretation:

POL( 0 ) = max{0, -3}

POL( s₁(x₁) ) = x₁ + 1

POL( TIMES₂(x₁, x₂) ) = x₁ + 1

POL( p₁(x₁) ) = max{0, x₁ - 1}

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

          ↳ QDP

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

EXP₂(x, s₁(y)) -> EXP₂(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

EXP₂(x, s₁(y)) -> EXP₂(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [17,21] with Interpretation:

POL( s₁(x₁) ) = 3x₁ + 1

POL( EXP₂(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₁ + 2x₂ + 2

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

          ↳ QDP

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

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> TOWERITER₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.

TOWERITER₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> TOWERITER₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial Order [17,21] with Interpretation:

POL( exp₂(x₁, x₂) ) = max{0, 3x₁ - 2}

POL( plus₂(x₁, x₂) ) = 2x₂ + 2

POL( s₁(x₁) ) = x₁ + 3

POL( 0 ) = 1

POL( times₂(x₁, x₂) ) = max{0, x₁ + x₂ - 3}

POL( TOWERITER₃(x₁, ..., x₃) ) = max{0, 2x₁ - 2}

POL( p₁(x₁) ) = max{0, x₁ - 2}

The following usable rules [14] were oriented:

p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

plus₂(0, x) -> x
plus₂(s₁(x), y) -> s₁(plus₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
times₂(0, y) -> 0
times₂(s₁(x), y) -> plus₂(y, times₂(p₁(s₁(x)), y))
exp₂(x, 0) -> s₁(0)
exp₂(x, s₁(y)) -> times₂(x, exp₂(x, y))
p₁(s₁(0)) -> 0
p₁(s₁(s₁(x))) -> s₁(p₁(s₁(x)))
tower₂(x, y) -> towerIter₃(x, y, s₁(0))
towerIter₃(0, y, z) -> z
towerIter₃(s₁(x), y, z) -> towerIter₃(p₁(s₁(x)), y, exp₂(y, z))

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.