Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpP6m8jC/t002.trs

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:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

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:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

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(x), s(y)) → -¹(x, y)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → -¹(s(x), s(y))
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → IF(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))
LEQ(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(x, y)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(y, x)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

-¹(s(x), s(y)) → -¹(x, y)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → -¹(s(x), s(y))
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → IF(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))
LEQ(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(x, y)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(y, x)
MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

-¹(s(x), s(y)) → -¹(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
As all Q-normal forms are R-normal forms we are in the innermost case. Hence, by the usable rules processor [15] we can delete all non-usable rules [17] from R.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

-¹(s(x), s(y)) → -¹(x, y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

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

-¹(s(x), s(y)) → -¹(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:

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

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

LEQ(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

              ↳ QDP

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

LEQ(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(x, y)

R is empty.
The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

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

LEQ(s(x), s(y)) → LEQ(x, y)

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

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

leq(0, y) → true
leq(s(x), 0) → false
leq(s(x), s(y)) → leq(x, y)
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → y
-(x, 0) → x
-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
mod(0, y) → 0
mod(s(x), 0) → 0
mod(s(x), s(y)) → if(leq(y, x), mod(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)), s(x))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

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

MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
-(x, 0) → x

The set Q consists of the following terms:

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
We deleted the following terms from Q as each root-symbol of these terms does neither occur in P nor in R.

leq(0, x0)
leq(s(x0), 0)
leq(s(x0), s(x1))
if(true, x0, x1)
if(false, x0, x1)
mod(0, x0)
mod(s(x0), 0)
mod(s(x0), s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ Rewriting

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

MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
-(x, 0) → x

The set Q consists of the following terms:

-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By rewriting [15] the rule MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(s(x), s(y)), s(y)) at position [0] we obtained the following new rules:

MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(x, y), s(y))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ Rewriting

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(x, y), s(y))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
-(x, 0) → x

The set Q consists of the following terms:

-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))

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.

MOD(s(x), s(y)) → MOD(-(x, y), s(y))

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(-(x₁, x₂)) = x₁
POL(0) = 0
POL(MOD(x₁, x₂)) = x₁
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

The following usable rules [17] were oriented:

-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
-(x, 0) → x

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ Rewriting

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ QDPOrderProof

                              ↳ QDP

                                ↳ PisEmptyProof

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

-(s(x), s(y)) → -(x, y)
-(x, 0) → x

The set Q consists of the following terms:

-(x0, 0)
-(s(x0), s(x1))

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