Termination w.r.t. Q proof of TRS/Zantema06hydra.trs

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:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, y))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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:

D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → D(g(g(0, x), y), z)
H(e(x), y) → D(x, y)
D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)
D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → G(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
H(e(x), y) → H(d(x, y), s(y))
G(e(x), e(y)) → G(x, y)
D(g(x, y), z) → G(d(x, z), e(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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:

D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → D(g(g(0, x), y), z)
H(e(x), y) → D(x, y)
D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)
D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → G(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
H(e(x), y) → H(d(x, y), s(y))
G(e(x), e(y)) → G(x, y)
D(g(x, y), z) → G(d(x, z), e(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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:

D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → D(g(g(0, x), y), z)
H(e(x), y) → D(x, y)
D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → G(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)
H(e(x), y) → H(d(x, y), s(y))
G(e(x), e(y)) → G(x, y)
D(g(x, y), z) → G(d(x, z), e(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, y))

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 3 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

G(e(x), e(y)) → G(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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.

G(e(x), e(y)) → G(x, y)

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

Recursive path order with status [2].
Precedence:

trivial

Status:

trivial

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:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

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

D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → D(g(g(0, x), y), z)
D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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.

D(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → D(g(g(0, x), y), z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)

Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
D(x1, x2) = x2
s(x1) = s(x1)

Recursive path order with status [2].
Precedence:

trivial

Status:

trivial

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

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

D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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.

D(g(x, y), z) → D(x, z)

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

Recursive path order with status [2].
Precedence:

trivial

Status:

trivial

The following usable rules [14] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QDPOrderProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ PisEmptyProof

              ↳ QDP

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

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, 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.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ EdgeDeletionProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

H(e(x), y) → H(d(x, y), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

h(e(x), y) → h(d(x, y), s(y))
d(g(g(0, x), y), s(z)) → g(e(x), d(g(g(0, x), y), z))
d(g(g(0, x), y), 0) → e(y)
d(g(0, x), y) → e(x)
d(g(x, y), z) → g(d(x, z), e(y))
g(e(x), e(y)) → e(g(x, y))

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