Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/SK902.29.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:

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

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:

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

prime(0)
prime(s(0))
prime(s(s(x0)))
prime1(x0, 0)
prime1(x0, s(0))
prime1(x0, s(s(x1)))
divp(x0, 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:

PRIME(s(s(x))) → PRIME1(s(s(x)), s(x))
PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → DIVP(s(s(y)), x)
PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → PRIME1(x, s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

prime(0)
prime(s(0))
prime(s(s(x0)))
prime1(x0, 0)
prime1(x0, s(0))
prime1(x0, s(s(x1)))
divp(x0, 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:

PRIME(s(s(x))) → PRIME1(s(s(x)), s(x))
PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → DIVP(s(s(y)), x)
PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → PRIME1(x, s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

prime(0)
prime(s(0))
prime(s(s(x0)))
prime1(x0, 0)
prime1(x0, s(0))
prime1(x0, s(s(x1)))
divp(x0, 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:

PRIME(s(s(x))) → PRIME1(s(s(x)), s(x))
PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → DIVP(s(s(y)), x)
PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → PRIME1(x, s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

prime(0)
prime(s(0))
prime(s(s(x0)))
prime1(x0, 0)
prime1(x0, s(0))
prime1(x0, s(s(x1)))
divp(x0, x1)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → PRIME1(x, s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

prime(0)
prime(s(0))
prime(s(s(x0)))
prime1(x0, 0)
prime1(x0, s(0))
prime1(x0, s(s(x1)))
divp(x0, 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.

PRIME1(x, s(s(y))) → PRIME1(x, s(y))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
PRIME1(x1, x2) = PRIME1(x2)
s(x1) = s(x1)

Recursive path order with status [2].
Quasi-Precedence:

[PRIME1₁, s_1]

Status:

s₁: multiset
PRIME1₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

            ↳ QDP

              ↳ DependencyGraphProof

                ↳ QDP

                  ↳ QDPOrderProof

                    ↳ QDP

                      ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

prime(0) → false
prime(s(0)) → false
prime(s(s(x))) → prime1(s(s(x)), s(x))
prime1(x, 0) → false
prime1(x, s(0)) → true
prime1(x, s(s(y))) → and(not(divp(s(s(y)), x)), prime1(x, s(y)))
divp(x, y) → =(rem(x, y), 0)

The set Q consists of the following terms:

prime(0)
prime(s(0))
prime(s(s(x0)))
prime1(x0, 0)
prime1(x0, s(0))
prime1(x0, s(s(x1)))
divp(x0, x1)

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