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:

if(if(x, y, z), u, v) → if(x, if(y, u, v), if(z, u, v))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

if(if(x, y, z), u, v) → if(x, if(y, u, v), if(z, u, v))

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:

IF(if(x, y, z), u, v) → IF(x, if(y, u, v), if(z, u, v))
IF(if(x, y, z), u, v) → IF(y, u, v)
IF(if(x, y, z), u, v) → IF(z, u, v)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(if(x, y, z), u, v) → if(x, if(y, u, v), if(z, u, v))

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ DependencyPairsProof
    ↳ QDP
      ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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

IF(if(x, y, z), u, v) → IF(x, if(y, u, v), if(z, u, v))
IF(if(x, y, z), u, v) → IF(y, u, v)
IF(if(x, y, z), u, v) → IF(z, u, v)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

if(if(x, y, z), u, v) → if(x, if(y, u, v), if(z, u, v))

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: