Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpXm2SMP/MYNAT_nosorts

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:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → 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:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

The set Q consists of the following terms:

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(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:

PLUS(N, s(M)) → PLUS(N, M)
X(N, s(M)) → PLUS(x(N, M), N)
AND(tt, X) → ACTIVATE(X)
X(N, s(M)) → X(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

The set Q consists of the following terms:

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(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:

PLUS(N, s(M)) → PLUS(N, M)
X(N, s(M)) → PLUS(x(N, M), N)
AND(tt, X) → ACTIVATE(X)
X(N, s(M)) → X(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

The set Q consists of the following terms:

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 2 SCCs with 2 less nodes.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

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

PLUS(N, s(M)) → PLUS(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

The set Q consists of the following terms:

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

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

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

PLUS(N, s(M)) → PLUS(N, M)

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

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

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.

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

              ↳ QDP

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

PLUS(N, s(M)) → PLUS(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:

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

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

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

X(N, s(M)) → X(N, M)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

and(tt, X) → activate(X)
plus(N, 0) → N
plus(N, s(M)) → s(plus(N, M))
x(N, 0) → 0
x(N, s(M)) → plus(x(N, M), N)
activate(X) → X

The set Q consists of the following terms:

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

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

X(N, s(M)) → X(N, M)

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

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

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.

and(tt, x0)
plus(x0, 0)
plus(x0, s(x1))
x(x0, 0)
x(x0, s(x1))
activate(x0)

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPSizeChangeProof

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

X(N, s(M)) → X(N, M)

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

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