Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/TRCSREx4_Zan97

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(X) → cons(X, n__f(g(X)))
g(0) → s(0)
g(s(X)) → s(s(g(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) → X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
f(X) → n__f(X)
activate(n__f(X)) → f(X)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DirectTerminationProof

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

f(X) → cons(X, n__f(g(X)))
g(0) → s(0)
g(s(X)) → s(s(g(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, Y)) → X
sel(s(X), cons(Y, Z)) → sel(X, activate(Z))
f(X) → n__f(X)
activate(n__f(X)) → f(X)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

We use [23] with the following order to prove termination.

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

0 > [cons₂, s_1]
sel₂ > [f₁, activate_1] > n_{_f₁} > [cons₂, s_1]
sel₂ > [f₁, activate_1] > g₁ > [cons₂, s_1]

Status:

sel₂: [1,2]
f₁: multiset
s₁: multiset
0: multiset
n_{_f₁}: multiset
g₁: multiset
cons₂: multiset
activate₁: multiset