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:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))

Q is empty.


↳ QTRS
  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, 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:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x0))


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

F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, f(a, x))
F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))
F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x0))

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:

F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, f(a, x))
F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))
F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x0))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 1 SCC with 1 less node.

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

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

F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, f(a, x))
F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, x)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x0))

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.


F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, f(a, x))
F(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → F(a, x)
The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.
none
Used ordering: Matrix interpretation [3]:
Non-tuple symbols:
M( a ) =
/0\
\0/

M( f(x1, x2) ) =
/1\
\0/
+
/10\
\10/
·x1+
/01\
\01/
·x2

Tuple symbols:
M( F(x1, x2) ) = 0+
[0,0]
·x1+
[0,1]
·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:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))



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

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

f(a, f(f(a, a), x)) → f(f(a, a), f(a, f(a, x)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

f(a, f(f(a, a), x0))

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