Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/TRCSREx8_BLR02

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:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → FIB1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
FIB(N) → SEL(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ADD(activate(X1), activate(X2))
FIB(N) → FIB1(s(0), s(0))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → FIB1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
FIB(N) → SEL(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ADD(activate(X1), activate(X2))
FIB(N) → FIB1(s(0), s(0))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → FIB1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
FIB(N) → SEL(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
FIB(N) → FIB1(s(0), s(0))
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ADD(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 3 SCCs with 5 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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.

ADD(s(X), Y) → ADD(X, Y)

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

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

s₁ > ADD₁

Status:

s₁: [1]
ADD₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ 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:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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

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

ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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.

ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)
ACTIVATE(n__add(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACTIVATE(x1) = ACTIVATE(x1)
n__add(x1, x2) = n__add(x1, x2)
n__fib1(x1, x2) = n__fib1(x1, x2)

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

trivial

Status:

n_{_add₂}: [2,1]
ACTIVATE₁: [1]
n_{_fib1₂}: [2,1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ 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:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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

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

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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.

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
SEL(x1, x2) = SEL(x1)
s(x1) = s(x1)
cons(x1, x2) = cons(x1, x2)
activate(x1) = activate
n__fib1(x1, x2) = n__fib1
fib1(x1, x2) = x2
add(x1, x2) = add(x1, x2)
0 = 0
n__add(x1, x2) = n__add

Lexicographic path order with status [19].
Quasi-Precedence:

SEL₁ > activate
[s₁, add₂, n_{_add]} > activate
cons₂ > activate
n_{_fib1} > activate

Status:

SEL₁: [1]
n_{_add}: []
add₂: [1,2]
n_{_fib1}: []
0: multiset
activate: []
s₁: [1]
cons₂: [1,2]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

fib(N) → sel(N, fib1(s(0), s(0)))
fib1(X, Y) → cons(X, n__fib1(Y, n__add(X, Y)))
add(0, X) → X
add(s(X), Y) → s(add(X, Y))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
fib1(X1, X2) → n__fib1(X1, X2)
add(X1, X2) → n__add(X1, X2)
activate(n__fib1(X1, X2)) → fib1(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(n__add(X1, X2)) → add(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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.