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(0, y) → s(y)
ack(s(x), 0) → ack(x, s(0))
ack(s(x), s(y)) → ack(x, ack(s(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:

ACK(s(x), 0) → ACK(x, s(0))
ACK(s(x), s(y)) → ACK(x, ack(s(x), y))
ACK(s(x), s(y)) → ACK(s(x), y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

ack(0, y) → s(y)
ack(s(x), 0) → ack(x, s(0))
ack(s(x), s(y)) → ack(x, ack(s(x), y))

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

(3) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

ACK(s(x), 0) → ACK(x, s(0))
ACK(s(x), s(y)) → ACK(x, ack(s(x), y))
ACK(s(x), s(y)) → ACK(s(x), y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Lexicographic path order with status [LPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

[ACK₂, 0, ack₂] > s₁

Status:

ACK₂: [1,2]
s₁: [1]
0: []
ack₂: [1,2]

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

ack(s(x), s(y)) → ack(x, ack(s(x), y))
ack(s(x), 0) → ack(x, s(0))
ack(0, y) → s(y)

(4) Obligation:

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

ack(0, y) → s(y)
ack(s(x), 0) → ack(x, s(0))
ack(s(x), s(y)) → ack(x, ack(s(x), y))

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

(5) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(6) TRUE