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

(0) Obligation:

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

ack_in(0, n) → ack_out(s(n))
ack_in(s(m), 0) → u11(ack_in(m, s(0)))
u11(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)
ack_in(s(m), s(n)) → u21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
u21(ack_out(n), m) → u22(ack_in(m, n))
u22(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)

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:

ACK_IN(s(m), 0) → U11(ack_in(m, s(0)))
ACK_IN(s(m), 0) → ACK_IN(m, s(0))
ACK_IN(s(m), s(n)) → U21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
ACK_IN(s(m), s(n)) → ACK_IN(s(m), n)
U21(ack_out(n), m) → U22(ack_in(m, n))
U21(ack_out(n), m) → ACK_IN(m, n)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ack_in(0, n) → ack_out(s(n))
ack_in(s(m), 0) → u11(ack_in(m, s(0)))
u11(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)
ack_in(s(m), s(n)) → u21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
u21(ack_out(n), m) → u22(ack_in(m, n))
u22(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)

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 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.

(4) Obligation:

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

ACK_IN(s(m), s(n)) → U21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
U21(ack_out(n), m) → ACK_IN(m, n)
ACK_IN(s(m), 0) → ACK_IN(m, s(0))
ACK_IN(s(m), s(n)) → ACK_IN(s(m), n)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ack_in(0, n) → ack_out(s(n))
ack_in(s(m), 0) → u11(ack_in(m, s(0)))
u11(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)
ack_in(s(m), s(n)) → u21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
u21(ack_out(n), m) → u22(ack_in(m, n))
u22(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)

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

(5) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

ACK_IN(s(m), s(n)) → U21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
U21(ack_out(n), m) → ACK_IN(m, n)
ACK_IN(s(m), 0) → ACK_IN(m, s(0))
ACK_IN(s(m), s(n)) → ACK_IN(s(m), n)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
ACK_IN(x0, x1, x2)  =  ACK_IN(x0, x2)
U21(x0, x1, x2)  =  U21(x0, x1)

Tags:
ACK_IN has argument tags [2,3,0] and root tag 1
U21 has argument tags [2,1,3] and root tag 0

Comparison: MS
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
ACK_IN(x1, x2)  =  ACK_IN(x1, x2)
s(x1)  =  s(x1)
U21(x1, x2)  =  U21(x1, x2)
ack_in(x1, x2)  =  ack_in(x1, x2)
ack_out(x1)  =  x1
0  =  0
u11(x1)  =  x1
u21(x1, x2)  =  u21(x1, x2)
u22(x1)  =  x1

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

[ACK_IN2, U21₂] > [ack_in2, 0, u21₂] > s₁

Status:

ACK_IN2: [1,2]
s₁: [1]
U21₂: [2,1]
ack_in2: [1,2]
0: []
u21₂: [2,1]

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

ack_in(s(m), 0) → u11(ack_in(m, s(0)))
ack_in(s(m), s(n)) → u21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
u21(ack_out(n), m) → u22(ack_in(m, n))
ack_in(0, n) → ack_out(s(n))
u11(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)
u22(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)

(6) Obligation:

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

ack_in(0, n) → ack_out(s(n))
ack_in(s(m), 0) → u11(ack_in(m, s(0)))
u11(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)
ack_in(s(m), s(n)) → u21(ack_in(s(m), n), m)
u21(ack_out(n), m) → u22(ack_in(m, n))
u22(ack_out(n)) → ack_out(n)

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

(7) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(8) TRUE