Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpa1mGzW/IJCAR

Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could be proven:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.

Using Dependency Pairs [1,15] we result in the following initial DP problem:
Q DP problem:
The TRS P consists of the following rules:

TIMES(s(x), y) → PLUS(y, times(x, y))
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → TIMES(y, z)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))
PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

TIMES(s(x), y) → PLUS(y, times(x, y))
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → TIMES(y, z)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))
PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 3 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We can use the usable rules and reduction pair processor [15] with the Ce-compatible extension of the polynomial order that maps every function symbol to the sum of its argument. Then, we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

R is empty.
Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By using the subterm criterion [20] together with the size-change analysis [32] we have proven that there are no infinite chains for this DP problem.

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

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

TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

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

TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)

From the DPs we obtained the following set of size-change graphs:

TIMES(s(x), y) → TIMES(x, y)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 >= 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)
DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

DIV(div(x, y), z) → DIV(x, times(y, z))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(0) = 0
POL(DIV(x₁, x₂)) = x₁
POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x₁
POL(div(x₁, x₂)) = 1 + x₁
POL(plus(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(s(x₁)) = x₁
POL(times(x₁, x₂)) = 0

The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We use the reduction pair processor [15].

The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted.

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [3]:
Non-tuple symbols:

M( s(x₁) ) =

/	1	\
\	0	/

/	1	0	\
\	0	0	/

x₁

M( 0 ) =

/	0	\
\	0	/

Tuple symbols:

M( QUOT(x₁, ..., x₃) ) =

[

]

x₁

[

]

x₂

[

]

x₃

M( DIV(x₁, x₂) ) =

[

]

x₁

[

]

x₂

Matrix type:
We used a basic matrix type which is not further parametrizeable.

As matrix orders are CE-compatible, we used usable rules w.r.t. argument filtering in the order.
The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ Instantiation

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By instantiating [15] the rule DIV(x, y) → QUOT(x, y, y) we obtained the following new rules:

DIV(y_0, s(y_1)) → QUOT(y_0, s(y_1), s(y_1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ QDPOrderProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPOrderProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ Instantiation

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → DIV(x, s(z))
DIV(y_0, s(y_1)) → QUOT(y_0, s(y_1), s(y_1))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(x, 0) → x
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
times(0, y) → 0
times(s(0), y) → y
times(s(x), y) → plus(y, times(x, y))
div(0, y) → 0
div(x, y) → quot(x, y, y)
quot(0, s(y), z) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(div(x, s(z)))
div(div(x, y), z) → div(x, times(y, z))

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.