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

(0) Obligation:

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

a(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

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:

V(a(a(x))) → U(v(x))
V(a(a(x))) → V(x)
V(a(c(x))) → U(b(d(x)))
W(a(a(x))) → U(w(x))
W(a(a(x))) → W(x)
W(a(c(x))) → U(b(d(x)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

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:

W(a(a(x))) → W(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

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.


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

Tags:
W has tags [0]

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

POL(a(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:

a(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

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:

V(a(a(x))) → V(x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

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.


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

Tags:
V has tags [0]

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

POL(a(x1)) = 1 + x1   

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(c(d(x))) → c(x)
u(b(d(d(x)))) → b(x)
v(a(a(x))) → u(v(x))
v(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
v(c(x)) → b(x)
w(a(a(x))) → u(w(x))
w(a(c(x))) → u(b(d(x)))
w(c(x)) → b(x)

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