Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/AProVEJFP

Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could not be shown:

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

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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:

ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → ACTIVE(z)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(x)
TOP(mark(x)) → PROPER(x)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(z)
TOP(ok(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → F(x, y, active(z))
ACTIVE(f(b, c, x)) → F(x, x, x)
TOP(ok(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(proper(x))
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(y)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → F(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
F(x, y, mark(z)) → F(x, y, z)
F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

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

ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → ACTIVE(z)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(x)
TOP(mark(x)) → PROPER(x)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(z)
TOP(ok(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → F(x, y, active(z))
ACTIVE(f(b, c, x)) → F(x, x, x)
TOP(ok(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(proper(x))
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(y)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → F(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
F(x, y, mark(z)) → F(x, y, z)
F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted some edges using various graph approximations

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

TOP(mark(x)) → PROPER(x)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(x)
ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → ACTIVE(z)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(z)
TOP(ok(x)) → ACTIVE(x)
ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → F(x, y, active(z))
ACTIVE(f(b, c, x)) → F(x, x, x)
TOP(ok(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(proper(x))
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(y)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → F(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)
F(x, y, mark(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 4 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

F(x, y, mark(z)) → F(x, y, z)
F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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.

F(x, y, mark(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1, x2, x3) = F(x3)
mark(x1) = mark(x1)
ok(x1) = x1

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:

mark₁ > F₁

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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.

F(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → F(x, y, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1, x2, x3) = x2
ok(x1) = ok(x1)

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:

trivial

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(x)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(z)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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.

PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(x)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(z)
PROPER(f(x, y, z)) → PROPER(y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
PROPER(x1) = PROPER(x1)
f(x1, x2, x3) = f(x1, x2, x3)

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:

f₃ > PROPER₁

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

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

ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → ACTIVE(z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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.

ACTIVE(f(x, y, z)) → ACTIVE(z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACTIVE(x1) = ACTIVE(x1)
f(x1, x2, x3) = f(x1, x2, x3)

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:

f₃ > ACTIVE₁

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

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

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

TOP(ok(x)) → TOP(active(x))
TOP(mark(x)) → TOP(proper(x))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(b, c, x)) → mark(f(x, x, x))
active(f(x, y, z)) → f(x, y, active(z))
active(d) → m(b)
f(x, y, mark(z)) → mark(f(x, y, z))
active(d) → mark(c)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
proper(d) → ok(d)
proper(f(x, y, z)) → f(proper(x), proper(y), proper(z))
f(ok(x), ok(y), ok(z)) → ok(f(x, y, z))
top(mark(x)) → top(proper(x))
top(ok(x)) → top(active(x))

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