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:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(min(X, Y), s(Y))
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)
LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))
LOG(s(s(X))) → QUOT(X, s(s(0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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 3 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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.

MIN(s(X), s(Y)) → MIN(X, Y)

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

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

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
MIN(x1, x2)  =  x2
s(x1)  =  s(x1)

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

trivial

Status:

s₁: [1]

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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:

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(min(X, Y), s(Y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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.

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(min(X, Y), s(Y))

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

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

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
QUOT(x1, x2)  =  QUOT(x1)
s(x1)  =  s(x1)
min(x1, x2)  =  min(x1)
0  =  0

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

s₁ > [QUOT₁, min₁]
0 > [QUOT₁, min₁]

Status:

QUOT₁: [1]
s₁: [1]
min₁: [1]
0: []

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)

(12) Obligation:

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

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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

(13) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(14) TRUE

(15) Obligation:

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

LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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

(16) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

LOG(s(s(X))) → LOG(s(quot(X, s(s(0)))))

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

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

Comparison: MAX
Underlying order for the size change arcs and the rules of R:
Combined order from the following AFS and order.
LOG(x1)  =  x1
s(x1)  =  s(x1)
quot(x1, x2)  =  x1
0  =  0
min(x1, x2)  =  x1

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

0 > s₁

Status:

s₁: [1]
0: []

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)

(17) Obligation:

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

min(X, 0) → X
min(s(X), s(Y)) → min(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(min(X, Y), s(Y)))
log(s(0)) → 0
log(s(s(X))) → s(log(s(quot(X, s(s(0))))))

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

(18) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(19) TRUE