YES We show the termination of the TRS R: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) match(X(),x) -> proper(x) proper(c()) -> ok(c()) proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) start(ok(x)) -> found(x) f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: top#(active(c())) -> top#(mark(c())) p2: top#(mark(x)) -> top#(check(x)) p3: top#(mark(x)) -> check#(x) p4: check#(f(x)) -> f#(check(x)) p5: check#(f(x)) -> check#(x) p6: check#(x) -> start#(match(f(X()),x)) p7: check#(x) -> match#(f(X()),x) p8: check#(x) -> f#(X()) p9: match#(f(x),f(y)) -> f#(match(x,y)) p10: match#(f(x),f(y)) -> match#(x,y) p11: match#(X(),x) -> proper#(x) p12: proper#(f(x)) -> f#(proper(x)) p13: proper#(f(x)) -> proper#(x) p14: f#(ok(x)) -> f#(x) p15: f#(found(x)) -> f#(x) p16: top#(found(x)) -> top#(active(x)) p17: top#(found(x)) -> active#(x) p18: active#(f(x)) -> f#(active(x)) p19: active#(f(x)) -> active#(x) p20: f#(mark(x)) -> f#(x) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2, p16} {p5} {p19} {p10} {p13} {p14, p15, p20} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: top#(active(c())) -> top#(mark(c())) p2: top#(mark(x)) -> top#(check(x)) p3: top#(found(x)) -> top#(active(x)) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: top#_A(x1) = 4 active_A(x1) = 7 c_A() = 4 mark_A(x1) = 6 check_A(x1) = 3 found_A(x1) = 1 f_A(x1) = x1 top_A(x1) = 5 start_A(x1) = 2 match_A(x1,x2) = 7 X_A() = 8 proper_A(x1) = 7 ok_A(x1) = x1 + 2 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: top#_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 c_A() = 7 mark_A(x1) = 5 check_A(x1) = 5 found_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = 5 top_A(x1) = 0 start_A(x1) = x1 match_A(x1,x2) = x1 X_A() = 7 proper_A(x1) = 7 ok_A(x1) = x1 top#!_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active!_A(x1) = 10 c!_A() = 7 mark!_A(x1) = 8 check!_A(x1) = x1 + 5 found!_A(x1) = 0 f!_A(x1) = 9 top!_A(x1) = 9 start!_A(x1) = 5 match!_A(x1,x2) = 11 X!_A() = 10 proper!_A(x1) = 10 ok!_A(x1) = 8 partial status: pi(top#) = [] pi(active) = [] pi(c) = [] pi(mark) = [] pi(check) = [] pi(found) = [] pi(f) = [] pi(top) = [] pi(start) = [] pi(match) = [] pi(X) = [] pi(proper) = [] pi(ok) = [1] The following rules are removed: p1 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: top#(mark(x)) -> top#(check(x)) p2: top#(found(x)) -> top#(active(x)) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: top#(mark(x)) -> top#(check(x)) p2: top#(found(x)) -> top#(active(x)) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r14, r15 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: top#_A(x1) = 12 mark_A(x1) = 3 check_A(x1) = 11 found_A(x1) = 4 active_A(x1) = x1 + 6 f_A(x1) = 5 start_A(x1) = x1 + 4 match_A(x1,x2) = 6 X_A() = 6 proper_A(x1) = 5 c_A() = 2 ok_A(x1) = 1 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: top#_A(x1) = x1 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 12 check_A(x1) = x1 + 11 found_A(x1) = x1 + 11 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 18 start_A(x1) = x1 + 10 match_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 1 X_A() = 1 proper_A(x1) = x1 + 1 c_A() = 6 ok_A(x1) = x1 + 1 top#!_A(x1) = x1 mark!_A(x1) = x1 + 5 check!_A(x1) = x1 + 12 found!_A(x1) = x1 + 2 active!_A(x1) = 12 f!_A(x1) = x1 + 10 start!_A(x1) = x1 + 2 match!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 9 X!_A() = 0 proper!_A(x1) = x1 + 8 c!_A() = 13 ok!_A(x1) = 11 partial status: pi(top#) = [] pi(mark) = [] pi(check) = [] pi(found) = [] pi(active) = [1] pi(f) = [] pi(start) = [1] pi(match) = [] pi(X) = [] pi(proper) = [] pi(c) = [] pi(ok) = [] The following rules are removed: p1, p2 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: check#(f(x)) -> check#(x) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: check#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 7 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: check#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 3 check#!_A(x1) = 0 f!_A(x1) = 7 partial status: pi(check#) = [1] pi(f) = [] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: active#(f(x)) -> active#(x) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: active#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 3 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: active#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 3 active#!_A(x1) = 0 f!_A(x1) = 7 partial status: pi(active#) = [1] pi(f) = [] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: match#(f(x),f(y)) -> match#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: match#_A(x1,x2) = x2 f_A(x1) = x1 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: match#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 f_A(x1) = x1 + 1 match#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 f!_A(x1) = x1 + 4 partial status: pi(match#) = [2] pi(f) = [1] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: proper#(f(x)) -> proper#(x) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: proper#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 5 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: proper#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 2 proper#!_A(x1) = 6 f!_A(x1) = 5 partial status: pi(proper#) = [1] pi(f) = [] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(ok(x)) -> f#(x) p2: f#(mark(x)) -> f#(x) p3: f#(found(x)) -> f#(x) and R consists of: r1: active(f(x)) -> mark(x) r2: top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c())) r3: top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x)) r4: check(f(x)) -> f(check(x)) r5: check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x)) r6: match(f(x),f(y)) -> f(match(x,y)) r7: match(X(),x) -> proper(x) r8: proper(c()) -> ok(c()) r9: proper(f(x)) -> f(proper(x)) r10: f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x)) r11: start(ok(x)) -> found(x) r12: f(found(x)) -> found(f(x)) r13: top(found(x)) -> top(active(x)) r14: active(f(x)) -> f(active(x)) r15: f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1) = 2 ok_A(x1) = x1 + 6 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 6 found_A(x1) = 1 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1) = x1 ok_A(x1) = x1 + 5 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 found_A(x1) = x1 + 8 f#!_A(x1) = x1 + 4 ok!_A(x1) = x1 + 5 mark!_A(x1) = 0 found!_A(x1) = 2 partial status: pi(f#) = [] pi(ok) = [1] pi(mark) = [] pi(found) = [] The following rules are removed: p1, p2, p3 Then no dependency pair remains.