Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

0 QTRS
↳1 DependencyPairsProof (⇔)
↳2 QDP
↳3 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
↳4 AND
    ↳5 QDP
        ↳6 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳7 QDP
        ↳8 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳9 TRUE
    ↳10 QDP
        ↳11 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳12 QDP
        ↳13 DependencyGraphProof (⇔)
        ↳14 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

times(x, plus(y, s(z))) → plus(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
times(x, 0) → 0
times(x, s(y)) → plus(times(x, y), x)
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

Q is empty.

(1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem.

(2) Obligation:

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

TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → PLUS(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))
TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → PLUS(y, times(s(z), 0))
TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(s(z), 0)
TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(x, s(z))
TIMES(x, s(y)) → PLUS(times(x, y), x)
TIMES(x, s(y)) → TIMES(x, y)
PLUS(x, s(y)) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, plus(y, s(z))) → plus(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
times(x, 0) → 0
times(x, s(y)) → plus(times(x, y), x)
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(3) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 2 SCCs with 4 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

PLUS(x, s(y)) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, plus(y, s(z))) → plus(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
times(x, 0) → 0
times(x, s(y)) → plus(times(x, y), x)
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(6) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


PLUS(x, s(y)) → PLUS(x, y)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
PLUS(x0, x1, x2)  =  PLUS(x0, x1)

Tags:
PLUS has argument tags [1,0,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: DMS
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(PLUS(x1, x2)) = 1 + x2   
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

times(x, plus(y, s(z))) → plus(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
times(x, 0) → 0
times(x, s(y)) → plus(times(x, y), x)
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(8) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.

(9) TRUE

(10) Obligation:

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

TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(x, s(z))
TIMES(x, s(y)) → TIMES(x, y)
TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, plus(y, s(z))) → plus(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
times(x, 0) → 0
times(x, s(y)) → plus(times(x, y), x)
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(11) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].


The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.


TIMES(x, s(y)) → TIMES(x, y)
TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0)))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
TIMES(x0, x1, x2)  =  TIMES(x0, x1, x2)

Tags:
TIMES has argument tags [0,3,0] and root tag 0

Comparison: DMS
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(0) = 0   
POL(TIMES(x1, x2)) = x2   
POL(plus(x1, x2)) = x1 + x2   
POL(s(x1)) = 1 + x1   
POL(times(x1, x2)) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

times(x, 0) → 0
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

(12) Obligation:

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

TIMES(x, plus(y, s(z))) → TIMES(x, s(z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

times(x, plus(y, s(z))) → plus(times(x, plus(y, times(s(z), 0))), times(x, s(z)))
times(x, 0) → 0
times(x, s(y)) → plus(times(x, y), x)
plus(x, 0) → x
plus(x, s(y)) → s(plus(x, y))

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

(13) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node.

(14) TRUE