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:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), 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:

A(h, h, h, x) → S(x)
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → S(h)
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)
A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)
A(s(l), h, h, z) → A(l, z, h, z)
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → S(s(+(x, y)))
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → S(+(x, y))
+¹(s(x), s(y)) → +¹(x, y)
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(x, +(y, z))
+¹(+(x, y), z) → +¹(y, z)
*¹(s(x), s(y)) → S(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))
*¹(s(x), s(y)) → +¹(+(*(x, y), x), y)
*¹(s(x), s(y)) → +¹(*(x, y), x)
*¹(s(x), s(y)) → *¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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 7 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

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

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(+(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   
POL(+¹(x₁, x₂)) = x₁   
POL(1) = 0   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(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(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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(s(x), s(y)) → *¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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(s(x), s(y)) → *¹(x, y)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(*¹(x₁, x₂)) = x₂   
POL(s(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(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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:

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)
A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)
A(s(l), h, h, z) → A(l, z, h, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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.

A(s(l), h, h, z) → A(l, z, h, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₁   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 0   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(17) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)
A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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

(18) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(l, s(x), h, z) → A(l, x, z, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₂   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 0   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(19) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))
A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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

(20) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
A(l, x, s(y), h) → A(l, x, y, s(h))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(1) = 1   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₃   
POL(a(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = 0   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

s(h) → 1

(21) Obligation:

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

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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

(22) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

A(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → A(l, x, s(y), z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:

POL(1) = 0   
POL(A(x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄)) = x₄   
POL(h) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(23) Obligation:

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

a(h, h, h, x) → s(x)
a(l, x, s(y), h) → a(l, x, y, s(h))
a(l, x, s(y), s(z)) → a(l, x, y, a(l, x, s(y), z))
a(l, s(x), h, z) → a(l, x, z, z)
a(s(l), h, h, z) → a(l, z, h, z)
+(x, h) → x
+(h, x) → x
+(s(x), s(y)) → s(s(+(x, y)))
+(+(x, y), z) → +(x, +(y, z))
s(h) → 1
*(h, x) → h
*(x, h) → h
*(s(x), s(y)) → s(+(+(*(x, y), x), y))

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

(24) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(25) TRUE