Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/TRCSREx9_Luc04

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:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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:

ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X1)
TOP(mark(X)) → PROPER(X)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X1)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(active(X1), X2, X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X3)
ACTIVE(f(a, b, X)) → F(X, X, X)
F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
TOP(ok(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(X1, X2, active(X3))
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))
TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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:

ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X1)
TOP(mark(X)) → PROPER(X)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X1)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(active(X1), X2, X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X3)
ACTIVE(f(a, b, X)) → F(X, X, X)
F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
TOP(ok(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(X1, X2, active(X3))
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))
TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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:

ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X1)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X1)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X3)
TOP(mark(X)) → PROPER(X)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(active(X1), X2, X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X3)
ACTIVE(f(a, b, X)) → F(X, X, X)
F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
TOP(ok(X)) → ACTIVE(X)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(X1, X2, active(X3))
TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))
TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X2)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → F(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
F(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [13,14,18] contains 4 SCCs with 6 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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.

F(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1, x2, x3) = F(x3)
mark(x1) = x1
ok(x1) = ok(x1)

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

ok₁ > F₁

Status:

ok₁: [1]
F₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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.

F(mark(X1), X2, X3) → F(X1, X2, X3)
F(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → F(X1, X2, X3)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
F(x1, x2, x3) = F(x1, x2, x3)
mark(x1) = mark(x1)

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

[F₃, mark_1]

Status:

mark₁: [1]
F₃: [3,2,1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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

              ↳ QDP

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

PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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.

PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X1)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X3)
PROPER(f(X1, X2, X3)) → PROPER(X2)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
PROPER(x1) = PROPER(x1)
f(x1, x2, x3) = f(x1, x2, x3)

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

[PROPER₁, f_3]

Status:

f₃: [3,2,1]
PROPER₁: [1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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

              ↳ QDP

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

ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X3)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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.

ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X1)
ACTIVE(f(X1, X2, X3)) → ACTIVE(X3)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACTIVE(x1) = ACTIVE(x1)
f(x1, x2, x3) = f(x1, x2, x3)

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

trivial

Status:

ACTIVE₁: [1]
f₃: [3,2,1]

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

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

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(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

              ↳ QDP

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

TOP(ok(X)) → TOP(active(X))
TOP(mark(X)) → TOP(proper(X))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(f(a, b, X)) → mark(f(X, X, X))
active(c) → mark(a)
active(c) → mark(b)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(active(X1), X2, X3)
active(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(X1, X2, active(X3))
f(mark(X1), X2, X3) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
f(X1, X2, mark(X3)) → mark(f(X1, X2, X3))
proper(f(X1, X2, X3)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2), proper(X3))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(b) → ok(b)
proper(c) → ok(c)
f(ok(X1), ok(X2), ok(X3)) → ok(f(X1, X2, X3))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

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