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:

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, 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(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
+¹(s(x), y) → +¹(x, y)
+¹(x, +(y, z)) → +¹(+(x, y), z)
+¹(x, +(y, z)) → +¹(x, y)
F(g(f(x))) → F(h(s(0), x))
F(g(h(x, y))) → F(h(s(x), y))
F(h(x, h(y, z))) → F(h(+(x, y), z))
F(h(x, h(y, z))) → +¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, 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 2 SCCs with 3 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, 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(x, s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
+¹(x, +(y, z)) → +¹(+(x, y), z)
+¹(x, +(y, z)) → +¹(x, y)

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, x2)

Tags:
+¹ has argument tags [3,1,0] 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.
+¹(x1, x2)  =  +¹
s(x1)  =  s(x1)
+(x1, x2)  =  +(x1, x2)
0  =  0

Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

s₁ > [+^1, +₂]

Status:

+^1: multiset
s₁: multiset
+₂: multiset
0: multiset

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(7) Obligation:

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

+¹(s(x), y) → +¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, y), z))

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

(8) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

+¹(s(x), y) → +¹(x, y)

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 [0,0,3] 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.
+¹(x1, x2)  =  +¹
s(x1)  =  s(x1)

Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

s₁ > +^1

Status:

+^1: multiset
s₁: [1]

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(9) Obligation:

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

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, y), z))

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

(10) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(11) TRUE

(12) Obligation:

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

F(h(x, h(y, z))) → F(h(+(x, y), z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, y), z))

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

(13) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

F(h(x, h(y, z))) → F(h(+(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:
F(x0, x1)  =  F(x0)

Tags:
F has argument tags [0,0] 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.
F(x1)  =  x1
h(x1, x2)  =  h(x2)
+(x1, x2)  =  x1
0  =  0
s(x1)  =  s

Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

0 > h₁
s > h₁

Status:

h₁: multiset
0: multiset
s: []

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(14) Obligation:

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

+(x, 0) → x
+(x, s(y)) → s(+(x, y))
+(0, y) → y
+(s(x), y) → s(+(x, y))
+(x, +(y, z)) → +(+(x, y), z)
f(g(f(x))) → f(h(s(0), x))
f(g(h(x, y))) → f(h(s(x), y))
f(h(x, h(y, z))) → f(h(+(x, y), z))

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

(15) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(16) TRUE