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, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
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:

__¹(__(X, Y), Z) → __¹(X, __(Y, Z))
__¹(__(X, Y), Z) → __¹(Y, Z)
U11¹(tt) → U12¹(tt)
ISNEPAL(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11¹(tt)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
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 1 SCC with 2 less nodes.

(4) Obligation:

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

__¹(__(X, Y), Z) → __¹(Y, Z)
__¹(__(X, Y), Z) → __¹(X, __(Y, Z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
activate(X) → X

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

(5) 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(Y, Z)

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 [2,2,3] and root tag 0

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

POL(__(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁ + x₂   
POL(__¹(x₁, x₂)) = x₁ + x₂   
POL(nil) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented:

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X

(6) Obligation:

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

__¹(__(X, Y), Z) → __¹(X, __(Y, Z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
activate(X) → X

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

(7) 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))

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(x1)

Tags:
__¹ 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(__(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁   
POL(__¹(x₁, x₂)) = 0   
POL(nil) = 0   

The following usable rules [FROCOS05] were oriented: none

(8) Obligation:

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

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
U11(tt) → U12(tt)
U12(tt) → tt
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → U11(tt)
activate(X) → X

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

(9) PisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

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

(10) TRUE