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:

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

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:

F(s(0)) → F(0)
F(+(x, y)) → F(y)
F(+(x, y)) → F(x)
F(+(x, s(0))) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

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:

F(s(0)) → F(0)
F(+(x, y)) → F(y)
F(+(x, y)) → F(x)
F(+(x, s(0))) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

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:

F(s(0)) → F(0)
F(+(x, y)) → F(y)
F(+(x, y)) → F(x)
F(+(x, s(0))) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

F(+(x, y)) → F(y)
F(+(x, y)) → F(x)
F(+(x, s(0))) → F(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

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)) → F(y)
F(+(x, y)) → F(x)
F(+(x, s(0))) → F(x)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1)  =  F(x1)
+(x1, x2)  =  +(x1, x2)
s(x1)  =  x1
0  =  0

Recursive Path Order [2].
Precedence:
+2 > F1
0 > F1

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none



↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ DependencyGraphProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ QDPOrderProof
                ↳ QDP
                  ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

f(0) → s(0)
f(s(0)) → s(s(0))
f(s(0)) → *(s(s(0)), f(0))
f(+(x, s(0))) → +(s(s(0)), f(x))
f(+(x, y)) → *(f(x), f(y))

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.