YES We show the termination of the TRS R: half(|0|()) -> |0|() half(s(|0|())) -> |0|() half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x)) le(|0|(),y) -> true() le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) inc(|0|()) -> |0|() inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) log(x) -> log2(x,|0|()) log2(x,y) -> if(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) if(true(),x,s(y)) -> y if(false(),x,y) -> log2(half(x),y) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: half#(s(s(x))) -> half#(x) p2: le#(s(x),s(y)) -> le#(x,y) p3: inc#(s(x)) -> inc#(x) p4: log#(x) -> log2#(x,|0|()) p5: log2#(x,y) -> if#(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) p6: log2#(x,y) -> le#(x,s(|0|())) p7: log2#(x,y) -> inc#(y) p8: if#(false(),x,y) -> log2#(half(x),y) p9: if#(false(),x,y) -> half#(x) and R consists of: r1: half(|0|()) -> |0|() r2: half(s(|0|())) -> |0|() r3: half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x)) r4: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r5: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r6: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r7: inc(|0|()) -> |0|() r8: inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) r9: log(x) -> log2(x,|0|()) r10: log2(x,y) -> if(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) r11: if(true(),x,s(y)) -> y r12: if(false(),x,y) -> log2(half(x),y) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p5, p8} {p1} {p2} {p3} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: log2#(x,y) -> if#(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) p2: if#(false(),x,y) -> log2#(half(x),y) and R consists of: r1: half(|0|()) -> |0|() r2: half(s(|0|())) -> |0|() r3: half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x)) r4: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r5: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r6: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r7: inc(|0|()) -> |0|() r8: inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) r9: log(x) -> log2(x,|0|()) r10: log2(x,y) -> if(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) r11: if(true(),x,s(y)) -> y r12: if(false(),x,y) -> log2(half(x),y) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: log2#_A(x1,x2) = max{21, x1 + 10} if#_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{21, x1 + 18, x2 + 10} le_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 19} s_A(x1) = max{34, x1 + 22} |0|_A = 12 inc_A(x1) = x1 + 3 false_A = 6 half_A(x1) = max{13, x1 - 11} true_A = 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: log2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 if#_A(x1,x2,x3) = 0 le_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 4 |0|_A() = 2 inc_A(x1) = 1 false_A() = 5 half_A(x1) = x1 + 2 true_A() = 3 log2#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 3 if#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = x1 + 1 le!_A(x1,x2) = 2 s!_A(x1) = 0 |0|!_A() = 2 inc!_A(x1) = 5 false!_A() = 1 half!_A(x1) = 0 true!_A() = 1 partial status: pi(log2#) = [] pi(if#) = [] pi(le) = [] pi(s) = [1] pi(|0|) = [] pi(inc) = [] pi(false) = [] pi(half) = [] pi(true) = [] 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: half#(s(s(x))) -> half#(x) and R consists of: r1: half(|0|()) -> |0|() r2: half(s(|0|())) -> |0|() r3: half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x)) r4: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r5: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r6: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r7: inc(|0|()) -> |0|() r8: inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) r9: log(x) -> log2(x,|0|()) r10: log2(x,y) -> if(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) r11: if(true(),x,s(y)) -> y r12: if(false(),x,y) -> log2(half(x),y) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: half#_A(x1) = max{18, x1 - 13} s_A(x1) = max{12, 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: half#_A(x1) = x1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 half#!_A(x1) = x1 + 5 s!_A(x1) = x1 + 3 partial status: pi(half#) = [] pi(s) = [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: le#(s(x),s(y)) -> le#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: half(|0|()) -> |0|() r2: half(s(|0|())) -> |0|() r3: half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x)) r4: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r5: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r6: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r7: inc(|0|()) -> |0|() r8: inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) r9: log(x) -> log2(x,|0|()) r10: log2(x,y) -> if(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) r11: if(true(),x,s(y)) -> y r12: if(false(),x,y) -> log2(half(x),y) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: le#_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 5} s_A(x1) = max{16, x1 + 4} base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: le#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 le#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 s!_A(x1) = 2 partial status: pi(le#) = [] pi(s) = [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: inc#(s(x)) -> inc#(x) and R consists of: r1: half(|0|()) -> |0|() r2: half(s(|0|())) -> |0|() r3: half(s(s(x))) -> s(half(x)) r4: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r5: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r6: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r7: inc(|0|()) -> |0|() r8: inc(s(x)) -> s(inc(x)) r9: log(x) -> log2(x,|0|()) r10: log2(x,y) -> if(le(x,s(|0|())),x,inc(y)) r11: if(true(),x,s(y)) -> y r12: if(false(),x,y) -> log2(half(x),y) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: inc#_A(x1) = max{16, x1 - 17} s_A(x1) = max{16, x1 + 13} base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: inc#_A(x1) = x1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 inc#!_A(x1) = x1 + 2 s!_A(x1) = x1 + 2 partial status: pi(inc#) = [] pi(s) = [1] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains.