YES We show the termination of the TRS R: app(app(minus(),x),|0|()) -> x app(app(minus(),app(s(),x)),app(s(),y)) -> app(app(minus(),x),y) app(f(),|0|()) -> app(s(),|0|()) app(f(),app(s(),x)) -> app(app(minus(),app(s(),x)),app(g(),app(f(),x))) app(g(),|0|()) -> |0|() app(g(),app(s(),x)) -> app(app(minus(),app(s(),x)),app(f(),app(g(),x))) app(app(map(),|fun|),nil()) -> nil() app(app(map(),|fun|),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(cons(),app(|fun|,x)),app(app(map(),|fun|),xs)) app(app(filter(),|fun|),nil()) -> nil() app(app(filter(),|fun|),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(app(app(filter2(),app(|fun|,x)),|fun|),x),xs) app(app(app(app(filter2(),true()),|fun|),x),xs) -> app(app(cons(),x),app(app(filter(),|fun|),xs)) app(app(app(app(filter2(),false()),|fun|),x),xs) -> app(app(filter(),|fun|),xs) Instead we prove termination of the uncurried system: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(f_0(),y) -> f_1#(y) p2: app#(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2#(x1,y) p3: app#(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4#(x1,x2,x3,y) p4: app#(g_0(),y) -> g_1#(y) p5: app#(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2#(x1,y) p6: app#(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2#(x1,y) p7: minus_2#(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2#(x,y) p8: f_1#(s_1(x)) -> minus_2#(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) p9: f_1#(s_1(x)) -> g_1#(f_1(x)) p10: f_1#(s_1(x)) -> f_1#(x) p11: g_1#(s_1(x)) -> minus_2#(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) p12: g_1#(s_1(x)) -> f_1#(g_1(x)) p13: g_1#(s_1(x)) -> g_1#(x) p14: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(|fun|,x) p15: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(|fun|,xs) p16: filter_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4#(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) p17: filter_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(|fun|,x) p18: filter2_4#(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) p19: filter2_4#(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p2, p3, p5, p14, p15, p16, p17, p18, p19} {p9, p10, p12, p13} {p7} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(|fun|,x) p2: app#(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2#(x1,y) p3: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(|fun|,xs) p4: app#(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4#(x1,x2,x3,y) p5: filter2_4#(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) p6: filter_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(|fun|,x) p7: app#(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2#(x1,y) p8: filter_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4#(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) p9: filter2_4#(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) The set of usable rules consists of r24 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: map_2#_A(x1,x2) = 4 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = 5 app#_A(x1,x2) = 4 map_1_A(x1) = x1 + 7 filter2_3_A(x1,x2,x3) = x1 + x2 + x3 + 6 filter2_4#_A(x1,x2,x3,x4) = 4 false_0_A() = 5 filter_2#_A(x1,x2) = 4 filter_1_A(x1) = x1 + 5 app_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 3 true_0_A() = 6 filter_2_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 2 nil_0_A() = 1 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: map_2#_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 112, x2 - 27} cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{26, x1 + 23, x2} app#_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 133, x2 - 4} map_1_A(x1) = x1 + 21 filter2_3_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 + 14, x2 + 58, x3 + 132} filter2_4#_A(x1,x2,x3,x4) = max{1, x2 - 75, x3 - 4, x4 - 27} false_0_A = 2 filter_2#_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 75, x2 - 27} filter_1_A(x1) = x1 + 58 app_A(x1,x2) = max{13, x1 - 131, x2 - 131} true_0_A = 0 filter_2_A(x1,x2) = max{26, x1 - 146, x2 + 1} nil_0_A = 27 map_2#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 5 cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{4, x1 - 42, x2 - 31} app#!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 15} map_1!_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 24} filter2_3!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{168, x1 - 9, x2 + 35} filter2_4#!_A(x1,x2,x3,x4) = x2 + 34 false_0!_A = 1 filter_2#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 34 filter_1!_A(x1) = max{32, x1 - 1} app!_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 22, x2 + 169} true_0!_A = 5 filter_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{169, x1 + 36, x2 + 6} nil_0!_A = 37 partial status: pi(map_2#) = [] pi(cons_2) = [] pi(app#) = [] pi(map_1) = [1] pi(filter2_3) = [2] pi(filter2_4#) = [] pi(false_0) = [] pi(filter_2#) = [] pi(filter_1) = [] pi(app) = [1, 2] pi(true_0) = [] pi(filter_2) = [1] pi(nil_0) = [] The following rules are removed: p2, p4, p6, p7 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(|fun|,x) p2: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(|fun|,xs) p3: filter2_4#(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) p4: filter_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4#(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) p5: filter2_4#(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p2} {p3, p4, p5} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: map_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(|fun|,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) 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: map_2#_A(x1,x2) = x2 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 4 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: map_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 28, x2 - 4} map_2#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 2, x2 - 5} partial status: pi(map_2#) = [2] pi(cons_2) = [] 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: filter2_4#(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) p2: filter_2#(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4#(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) p3: filter2_4#(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2#(|fun|,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) The set of usable rules consists of r24 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: filter2_4#_A(x1,x2,x3,x4) = x2 + x4 + 4 false_0_A() = 3 filter_2#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 3 app_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 8 true_0_A() = 3 filter_2_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 4 nil_0_A() = 1 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: filter2_4#_A(x1,x2,x3,x4) = max{2, x2 - 1, x3 - 15, x4 + 1} false_0_A = 6 filter_2#_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 1, x2 - 13} cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 2, x2 + 14} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 46, x2 + 10} true_0_A = 6 filter_2_A(x1,x2) = max{12, x1 - 54, x2} nil_0_A = 13 filter2_4#!_A(x1,x2,x3,x4) = max{x2 + 6, x4 - 30} false_0!_A = 3 filter_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{6, x2 - 45} cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{4, x1 - 27, x2 - 29} app!_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 40, x2 + 4} true_0!_A = 3 filter_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{4, x1 - 81, x2 - 27} nil_0!_A = 0 partial status: pi(filter2_4#) = [4] pi(false_0) = [] pi(filter_2#) = [] pi(cons_2) = [] pi(app) = [1, 2] pi(true_0) = [] pi(filter_2) = [] pi(nil_0) = [] The following rules are removed: p1, p2, p3 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: g_1#(s_1(x)) -> f_1#(g_1(x)) p2: f_1#(s_1(x)) -> f_1#(x) p3: f_1#(s_1(x)) -> g_1#(f_1(x)) p4: g_1#(s_1(x)) -> g_1#(x) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) The set of usable rules consists of r16, r17, r18, r19, r20, r21 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: g_1#_A(x1) = x1 s_1_A(x1) = x1 + 7 f_1#_A(x1) = x1 + 2 g_1_A(x1) = x1 + 4 f_1_A(x1) = x1 + 8 minus_2_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 3 |0|_0_A() = 1 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: g_1#_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 46} s_1_A(x1) = max{33, x1 + 10} f_1#_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 46} g_1_A(x1) = max{34, x1 + 10} f_1_A(x1) = max{45, x1 + 2} minus_2_A(x1,x2) = max{36, x1 + 2, x2 - 56} |0|_0_A = 35 g_1#!_A(x1) = max{3, x1 - 3} s_1!_A(x1) = x1 + 6 f_1#!_A(x1) = 30 g_1!_A(x1) = 6 f_1!_A(x1) = max{42, x1 - 36} minus_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 60, x2 - 59} |0|_0!_A = 1 partial status: pi(g_1#) = [1] pi(s_1) = [1] pi(f_1#) = [] pi(g_1) = [] pi(f_1) = [] pi(minus_2) = [] pi(|0|_0) = [] The following rules are removed: p1, p2, p3, p4 Then no dependency pair remains. -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: minus_2#(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(f_0(),y) -> f_1(y) r4: app(filter_0(),y) -> filter_1(y) r5: app(filter_1(x1),y) -> filter_2(x1,y) r6: app(filter2_0(),y) -> filter2_1(y) r7: app(filter2_1(x1),y) -> filter2_2(x1,y) r8: app(filter2_2(x1,x2),y) -> filter2_3(x1,x2,y) r9: app(filter2_3(x1,x2,x3),y) -> filter2_4(x1,x2,x3,y) r10: app(g_0(),y) -> g_1(y) r11: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r12: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r13: app(minus_0(),y) -> minus_1(y) r14: app(minus_1(x1),y) -> minus_2(x1,y) r15: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r16: minus_2(x,|0|_0()) -> x r17: minus_2(s_1(x),s_1(y)) -> minus_2(x,y) r18: f_1(|0|_0()) -> s_1(|0|_0()) r19: f_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),g_1(f_1(x))) r20: g_1(|0|_0()) -> |0|_0() r21: g_1(s_1(x)) -> minus_2(s_1(x),f_1(g_1(x))) r22: map_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r23: map_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(|fun|,x),map_2(|fun|,xs)) r24: filter_2(|fun|,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r25: filter_2(|fun|,cons_2(x,xs)) -> filter2_4(app(|fun|,x),|fun|,x,xs) r26: filter2_4(true_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> cons_2(x,filter_2(|fun|,xs)) r27: filter2_4(false_0(),|fun|,x,xs) -> filter_2(|fun|,xs) 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: minus_2#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 6 s_1_A(x1) = x1 + 5 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: minus_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1_A(x1) = max{14, x1 - 62} minus_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{15, x2 - 24} s_1!_A(x1) = max{14, x1 - 23} partial status: pi(minus_2#) = [1] pi(s_1) = [1] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains.