Termination w.r.t. Q proof of /tmp/tmpXMGZ9d/#4.23.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:

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

Q is empty.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

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

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

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:

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, 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:

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → PLUS(z, s(0))
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))
PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, 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:

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → PLUS(z, s(0))
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))
PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, s(x1))

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 2 SCCs with 1 less node.

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

              ↳ QDP

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

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, 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

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

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)

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

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, 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.

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, s(x1))

↳ 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(s(x), y) → PLUS(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:

PLUS(s(x), y) → PLUS(x, y)
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:

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

quot(0, s(y), s(z)) → 0
quot(s(x), s(y), z) → quot(x, y, z)
plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))
quot(x, 0, s(z)) → s(quot(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, s(x1))

↳ 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:

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)
quot(x0, 0, 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.

quot(0, s(x0), s(x1))
quot(s(x0), s(x1), x2)
quot(x0, 0, s(x1))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

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

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)
QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), 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.

QUOT(s(x), s(y), z) → QUOT(x, y, z)

The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly.

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))

Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [25]:

POL(0) = 0
POL(QUOT(x₁, x₂, x₃)) = x₁
POL(plus(x₁, x₂)) = 0
POL(s(x₁)) = 1 + x₁

The following usable rules [17] were oriented: none

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ Narrowing

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

QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
By narrowing [15] the rule QUOT(x, 0, s(z)) → QUOT(x, plus(z, s(0)), s(z)) at position [1] we obtained the following new rules:

QUOT(y0, 0, s(0)) → QUOT(y0, s(0), s(0))
QUOT(y0, 0, s(s(x0))) → QUOT(y0, s(plus(x0, s(0))), s(s(x0)))

↳ QTRS

  ↳ Overlay + Local Confluence

    ↳ QTRS

      ↳ DependencyPairsProof

        ↳ QDP

          ↳ DependencyGraphProof

            ↳ AND

              ↳ QDP

              ↳ QDP

                ↳ UsableRulesProof

                  ↳ QDP

                    ↳ QReductionProof

                      ↳ QDP

                        ↳ QDPOrderProof

                          ↳ QDP

                            ↳ Narrowing

                              ↳ QDP

                                ↳ DependencyGraphProof

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

QUOT(y0, 0, s(0)) → QUOT(y0, s(0), s(0))
QUOT(y0, 0, s(s(x0))) → QUOT(y0, s(plus(x0, s(0))), s(s(x0)))

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

plus(0, y) → y
plus(s(x), y) → s(plus(x, y))

The set Q consists of the following terms:

plus(0, x0)
plus(s(x0), x1)

We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains.
The approximation of the Dependency Graph [15,17,22] contains 0 SCCs with 2 less nodes.