Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpncwgwH/maude2.trs

Termination w.r.t. Q of the following Term Rewriting System could not be shown:

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

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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:

*¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(N, +(M, *(N, M)))
GT(s(N), s(M)) → GT(N, M)
U_11(True, N, NzM) → GT(N, NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → U_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
U_1(True, N, NzM) → QUOT(d(N, NzM), NzM)
U_3(True, NzN, NzM) → D(NzN, NzM)
GCD(NzN, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzN)
GT(NzN, 0) → IS_NZNAT(NzN)
*¹(s(N), s(M)) → *¹(N, M)
+¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(N, M)
U_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → GT(NzN, NzM)
QUOT(NzM, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → U_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
GCD(NzM, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
GT(NzN, 0) → U_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
D(s(N), s(M)) → D(N, M)
U_21(True, NzM, N) → U_2(gt(NzM, N))
U_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → U_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
U_1(True, N, NzM) → D(N, NzM)
GCD(NzN, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
GCD(NzM, NzM) → U_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
QUOT(NzM, NzM) → U_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
GCD(NzN, NzM) → U_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
U_11(True, N, NzM) → U_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
U_21(True, NzM, N) → GT(NzM, N)
*¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(M, *(N, M))
LT(N, M) → GT(M, N)
U_3(True, NzN, NzM) → GCD(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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:

*¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(N, +(M, *(N, M)))
GT(s(N), s(M)) → GT(N, M)
U_11(True, N, NzM) → GT(N, NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → U_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
U_1(True, N, NzM) → QUOT(d(N, NzM), NzM)
U_3(True, NzN, NzM) → D(NzN, NzM)
GCD(NzN, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzN)
GT(NzN, 0) → IS_NZNAT(NzN)
*¹(s(N), s(M)) → *¹(N, M)
+¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(N, M)
U_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → GT(NzN, NzM)
QUOT(NzM, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → U_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
GCD(NzM, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
GT(NzN, 0) → U_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
D(s(N), s(M)) → D(N, M)
U_21(True, NzM, N) → U_2(gt(NzM, N))
U_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → U_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
U_1(True, N, NzM) → D(N, NzM)
GCD(NzN, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
GCD(NzM, NzM) → U_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
QUOT(NzM, NzM) → U_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
GCD(NzN, NzM) → U_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
U_11(True, N, NzM) → U_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → IS_NZNAT(NzM)
U_21(True, NzM, N) → GT(NzM, N)
*¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(M, *(N, M))
LT(N, M) → GT(M, N)
U_3(True, NzN, NzM) → GCD(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

Q is empty.
We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 6 SCCs with 19 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

D(s(N), s(M)) → D(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

D(s(N), s(M)) → D(N, M)

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:

D(s(N), s(M)) → D(N, M)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

GT(s(N), s(M)) → GT(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

            ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

GT(s(N), s(M)) → GT(N, M)

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

GT(s(N), s(M)) → GT(N, M)
The graph contains the following edges 1 > 1, 2 > 2

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

U_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → U_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
U_3(True, NzN, NzM) → GCD(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)
GCD(NzN, NzM) → U_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

U_11(True, N, NzM) → U_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
U_1(True, N, NzM) → QUOT(d(N, NzM), NzM)
QUOT(N, NzM) → U_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

+¹(s(N), s(M)) → +¹(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

    ↳ QDP

      ↳ DependencyGraphProof

        ↳ AND

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

          ↳ QDP

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

*¹(s(N), s(M)) → *¹(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

p(s(N)) → N
+(N, 0) → N
+(s(N), s(M)) → s(s(+(N, M)))
*(N, 0) → 0
*(s(N), s(M)) → s(+(N, +(M, *(N, M))))
gt(0, M) → False
gt(NzN, 0) → u_4(is_NzNat(NzN))
u_4(True) → True
is_NzNat(0) → False
is_NzNat(s(N)) → True
gt(s(N), s(M)) → gt(N, M)
lt(N, M) → gt(M, N)
d(0, N) → N
d(s(N), s(M)) → d(N, M)
quot(N, NzM) → u_11(is_NzNat(NzM), N, NzM)
u_11(True, N, NzM) → u_1(gt(N, NzM), N, NzM)
u_1(True, N, NzM) → s(quot(d(N, NzM), NzM))
quot(NzM, NzM) → u_01(is_NzNat(NzM))
u_01(True) → s(0)
quot(N, NzM) → u_21(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM, N)
u_21(True, NzM, N) → u_2(gt(NzM, N))
u_2(True) → 0
gcd(0, N) → 0
gcd(NzM, NzM) → u_02(is_NzNat(NzM), NzM)
u_02(True, NzM) → NzM
gcd(NzN, NzM) → u_31(is_NzNat(NzN), is_NzNat(NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_31(True, True, NzN, NzM) → u_3(gt(NzN, NzM), NzN, NzM)
u_3(True, NzN, NzM) → gcd(d(NzN, NzM), NzM)

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