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:

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

Q is empty.

The TRS is overlay and locally confluent. By [19] we can switch to innermost.

↳ QTRS
  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

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

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)


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(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, y)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(:(x, y), z), u)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, y), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)

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

↳ QTRS
  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, y)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(:(x, y), z), u)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, y), z)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)

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.


:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, z)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(x, y)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(:(x, y), z), u)
:1(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :1(:(x, y), z)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Combined order from the following AFS and order.
:1(x1, x2)  =  :1(x1, x2)
:(x1, x2)  =  :(x1, x2)
C  =  C

Recursive path order with status [2].
Quasi-Precedence:
:^12 > :2
C > :2

Status:
:2: [1,2]
:^12: [1,2]
C: multiset


The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))



↳ QTRS
  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence
    ↳ QTRS
      ↳ DependencyPairsProof
        ↳ QDP
          ↳ QDPOrderProof
            ↳ QDP
              ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

:(:(:(:(C, x), y), z), u) → :(:(x, z), :(:(:(x, y), z), u))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

:(:(:(:(C, x0), x1), x2), x3)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The TRS P is empty. Hence, there is no (P,Q,R) chain.