Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/D3321.trs

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:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

Q is empty.

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [15] we can switch to innermost.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

Using Dependency Pairs [1,13] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

*¹(s(x), y) → +¹(*(x, y), y)
+¹(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
*¹(s(x), y) → *¹(x, y)
FACT(s(x)) → P(s(x))
FACT(s(x)) → *¹(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
FACT(s(x)) → FACT(p(s(x)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

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

*¹(s(x), y) → +¹(*(x, y), y)
+¹(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
*¹(s(x), y) → *¹(x, y)
FACT(s(x)) → P(s(x))
FACT(s(x)) → *¹(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
FACT(s(x)) → FACT(p(s(x)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

*¹(s(x), y) → +¹(*(x, y), y)
+¹(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
FACT(s(x)) → P(s(x))
*¹(s(x), y) → *¹(x, y)
FACT(s(x)) → *¹(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
FACT(s(x)) → FACT(p(s(x)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 3 SCCs with 3 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

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

+¹(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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.

+¹(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
+¹(x1, x2) = +¹(x1, x2)
s(x1) = s(x1)

Recursive path order with status [2].
Precedence:

s₁ > +^1₂

Status:

s₁: multiset
+^1₂: [1,2]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

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

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

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

*¹(s(x), y) → *¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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.

*¹(s(x), y) → *¹(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
*¹(x1, x2) = *¹(x1)
s(x1) = s(x1)

Recursive path order with status [2].
Precedence:

s₁ > *^1₁

Status:

*^1₁: multiset
s₁: multiset

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

                  ↳ QDP

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

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ AND

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDP

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

FACT(s(x)) → FACT(p(s(x)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(x)) → x
fact(0) → s(0)
fact(s(x)) → *(s(x), fact(p(s(x))))
*(0, y) → 0
*(s(x), y) → +(*(x, y), y)
+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

p(s(x0))
fact(0)
fact(s(x0))
*(0, x0)
*(s(x0), x1)
+(x0, 0)
+(x0, s(x1))

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