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:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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:

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))
SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → MINUS(X, Y)
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → S(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))
QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → MINUS(X, Y)
ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → QUOT(X, Y)
ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(YS)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → FROM(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → S(activate(X))
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ZWQUOT(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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 4 SCCs with 6 less nodes.

(4) Complex Obligation (AND)

(5) Obligation:

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

MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → MINUS(X, Y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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.

MINUS(s(X), s(Y)) → MINUS(X, Y)

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

Tags:
MINUS has argument tags [2,3,1] and root tag 0

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

POL(MINUS(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
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:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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:

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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.

QUOT(s(X), s(Y)) → QUOT(minus(X, Y), s(Y))

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

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

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

POL(0) = 0   
POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂)) = x₁   
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = x₁   
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)

(12) Obligation:

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

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → 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

(15) Obligation:

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

ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ZWQUOT(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(YS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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.

ACTIVATE(n__from(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
ZWQUOT(x0, x1, x2)  =  ZWQUOT(x1, x2)
ACTIVATE(x0, x1)  =  ACTIVATE(x0)

Tags:
ZWQUOT has argument tags [7,1,1] and root tag 0
ACTIVATE has argument tags [1,6] and root tag 0

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

POL(0) = 1   
POL(ACTIVATE(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(ZWQUOT(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
POL(activate(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₂   
POL(from(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = 0   
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(n__s(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(n__zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(nil) = 0   
POL(quot(x₁, x₂)) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(17) Obligation:

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

ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ZWQUOT(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(YS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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.

ACTIVATE(n__s(X)) → ACTIVATE(X)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
ZWQUOT(x0, x1, x2)  =  ZWQUOT(x0)
ACTIVATE(x0, x1)  =  ACTIVATE(x0, x1)

Tags:
ZWQUOT has argument tags [1,6,1] and root tag 0
ACTIVATE has argument tags [1,1] and root tag 0

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

POL(0) = 0   
POL(ACTIVATE(x₁)) = 0   
POL(ZWQUOT(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(activate(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₂   
POL(from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = x₂   
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(n__zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(nil) = 0   
POL(quot(x₁, x₂)) = x₁   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
s(X) → n__s(X)
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)

(19) Obligation:

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

ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ZWQUOT(activate(X1), activate(X2))
ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(YS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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.

ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(YS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X1)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ACTIVATE(X2)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
ZWQUOT(x0, x1, x2)  =  ZWQUOT(x0, x1)
ACTIVATE(x0, x1)  =  ACTIVATE(x0, x1)

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

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

POL(0) = 1   
POL(ACTIVATE(x₁)) = 0   
POL(ZWQUOT(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₂   
POL(activate(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₂   
POL(from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = 0   
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 0   
POL(n__zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   
POL(nil) = 0   
POL(quot(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
POL(s(x₁)) = 0   
POL(zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
s(X) → n__s(X)
from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)

(21) Obligation:

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

ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ZWQUOT(activate(X1), activate(X2))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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.

ZWQUOT(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → ACTIVATE(XS)
ACTIVATE(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → ZWQUOT(activate(X1), activate(X2))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
Used ordering: SCNP Order with the following components:
Level mapping:
Top level AFS:
ZWQUOT(x0, x1, x2)  =  ZWQUOT(x1)
ACTIVATE(x0, x1)  =  ACTIVATE(x0, x1)

Tags:
ZWQUOT has argument tags [4,0,7] and root tag 1
ACTIVATE has argument tags [0,0] and root tag 0

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

POL(0) = 1   
POL(ACTIVATE(x₁)) = 0   
POL(ZWQUOT(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
POL(activate(x₁)) = x₁   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₂   
POL(from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 1   
POL(n__zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(nil) = 1   
POL(quot(x₁, x₂)) = 0   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1   
POL(zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = 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:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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

(26) Obligation:

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

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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

(27) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

SEL(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → SEL(N, activate(XS))

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

Tags:
SEL has argument tags [3,3,3] and root tag 0

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

POL(0) = 0   
POL(SEL(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
POL(activate(x₁)) = 1   
POL(cons(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(from(x₁)) = 0   
POL(minus(x₁, x₂)) = 1   
POL(n__from(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(n__s(x₁)) = 1   
POL(n__zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = 0   
POL(nil) = 1   
POL(quot(x₁, x₂)) = x₁   
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(zWquot(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(28) Obligation:

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

from(X) → cons(X, n__from(n__s(X)))
sel(0, cons(X, XS)) → X
sel(s(N), cons(X, XS)) → sel(N, activate(XS))
minus(X, 0) → 0
minus(s(X), s(Y)) → minus(X, Y)
quot(0, s(Y)) → 0
quot(s(X), s(Y)) → s(quot(minus(X, Y), s(Y)))
zWquot(XS, nil) → nil
zWquot(nil, XS) → nil
zWquot(cons(X, XS), cons(Y, YS)) → cons(quot(X, Y), n__zWquot(activate(XS), activate(YS)))
from(X) → n__from(X)
s(X) → n__s(X)
zWquot(X1, X2) → n__zWquot(X1, X2)
activate(n__from(X)) → from(activate(X))
activate(n__s(X)) → s(activate(X))
activate(n__zWquot(X1, X2)) → zWquot(activate(X1), activate(X2))
activate(X) → X

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

(29) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(30) TRUE