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 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳14 TRUE
    ↳15 QDP
        ↳16 QDPOrderProof (⇔)
        ↳17 QDP
        ↳18 PisEmptyProof (⇔)
        ↳19 TRUE

(0) Obligation:

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

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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:

+1(a, b) → +1(b, a)
+1(a, +(b, z)) → +1(b, +(a, z))
+1(a, +(b, z)) → +1(a, z)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
F(+(x, y), z) → +1(f(x, z), f(y, z))
F(+(x, y), z) → F(x, z)
F(+(x, y), z) → F(y, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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 3 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

+1(a, +(b, z)) → +1(a, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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.


+1(a, +(b, z)) → +1(a, z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
+1(x0, x1, x2)  =  +1(x2)

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

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

POL(+(x1, x2)) = 1 + x2   
POL(+1(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1   
POL(a) = 1   
POL(b) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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:

+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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.


+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(y, z)
+1(+(x, y), z) → +1(x, +(y, z))
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
+1(x0, x1, x2)  =  +1(x0, x1)

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

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

POL(+(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 + x2   
POL(+1(x1, x2)) = 0   
POL(a) = 0   
POL(b) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(12) Obligation:

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

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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:

F(+(x, y), z) → F(y, z)
F(+(x, y), z) → F(x, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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.


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

Tags:
F has argument tags [1,2,2] and root tag 0

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

POL(+(x1, x2)) = 1 + x1 + x2   
POL(F(x1, x2)) = 1   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(17) Obligation:

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

+(a, b) → +(b, a)
+(a, +(b, z)) → +(b, +(a, z))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
f(a, y) → a
f(b, y) → b
f(+(x, y), z) → +(f(x, z), f(y, z))

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