YES We show the termination of the TRS R: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() +(x,|#|()) -> x +(|#|(),x) -> x +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: +#(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|#(+(x,y)) p2: +#(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p3: +#(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p4: +#(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p5: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|#(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) p6: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(+(x,y),|1|(|#|())) p7: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p8: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(x,+(y,z)) p9: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(y,z) p10: *#(|0|(x),y) -> |0|#(*(x,y)) p11: *#(|0|(x),y) -> *#(x,y) p12: *#(|1|(x),y) -> +#(|0|(*(x,y)),y) p13: *#(|1|(x),y) -> |0|#(*(x,y)) p14: *#(|1|(x),y) -> *#(x,y) p15: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(x,*(y,z)) p16: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(y,z) p17: sum#(nil()) -> |0|#(|#|()) p18: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> +#(x,sum(l)) p19: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> sum#(l) p20: prod#(cons(x,l)) -> *#(x,prod(l)) p21: prod#(cons(x,l)) -> prod#(l) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p19} {p21} {p11, p14, p15, p16} {p2, p3, p4, p6, p7, p8, p9} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> sum#(l) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) 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: sum#_A(x1) = x1 + 37 cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 29, x2 + 38} base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: sum#_A(x1) = 0 cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 1 sum#!_A(x1) = x1 + 7 cons!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 6 partial status: pi(sum#) = [1] pi(cons) = [1, 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: prod#(cons(x,l)) -> prod#(l) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) 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: prod#_A(x1) = max{3, x1 - 5} cons_A(x1,x2) = max{9, x1 + 2, x2 + 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: prod#_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1 prod#!_A(x1) = 3 cons!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 3 partial status: pi(prod#) = [] 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: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(y,z) p2: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(x,*(y,z)) p3: *#(|1|(x),y) -> *#(x,y) p4: *#(|0|(x),y) -> *#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) The set of usable rules consists of r2, r3, r9 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: *#_A(x1,x2) = 26 *_A(x1,x2) = max{33, x1 - 67, x2 - 67} |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 66 |0|_A(x1) = max{27, x1 + 22} +_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 38, x2 + 7} |#|_A = 8 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: *#_A(x1,x2) = x1 *_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 33 |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 6 |0|_A(x1) = x1 + 17 +_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 4 |#|_A() = 1 *#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 *!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 34 |1|!_A(x1) = 33 |0|!_A(x1) = x1 + 19 +!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 8 |#|!_A() = 21 partial status: pi(*#) = [] pi(*) = [] pi(|1|) = [] pi(|0|) = [1] pi(+) = [1] pi(|#|) = [] 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: +#(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p2: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(y,z) p3: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(x,+(y,z)) p4: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p5: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(+(x,y),|1|(|#|())) p6: +#(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(x,y) p7: +#(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> +#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: +#_A(x1,x2) = 1 |0|_A(x1) = max{10, x1 - 3} +_A(x1,x2) = max{14, x1, x2} |1|_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 3} |#|_A = 9 base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: +#_A(x1,x2) = 0 |0|_A(x1) = x1 + 4 +_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 8 |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 18 |#|_A() = 4 +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 |0|!_A(x1) = 38 +!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 35 |1|!_A(x1) = x1 + 31 |#|!_A() = 37 partial status: pi(+#) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(+) = [1, 2] pi(|1|) = [] pi(|#|) = [] The following rules are removed: p1, p2, p4, p5, p6, p7 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(x,+(y,z)) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(x,+(y,z)) and R consists of: r1: |0|(|#|()) -> |#|() r2: +(x,|#|()) -> x r3: +(|#|(),x) -> x r4: +(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> |0|(+(x,y)) r5: +(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r6: +(|1|(x),|0|(y)) -> |1|(+(x,y)) r7: +(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> |0|(+(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))) r8: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z)) r9: *(|#|(),x) -> |#|() r10: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y)) r11: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y) r12: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z)) r13: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|()) r14: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l)) r15: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|()) r16: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l)) The set of usable rules consists of r2, r5, r6, r9 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: +#_A(x1,x2) = max{46, x1 + 27} +_A(x1,x2) = max{45, x1 + 17, x2 - 5} |#|_A = 0 |0|_A(x1) = 7 |1|_A(x1) = 8 *_A(x1,x2) = max{10, x1 - 11, x2 + 6} base order 2: marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: +#_A(x1,x2) = x1 +_A(x1,x2) = x1 |#|_A() = 1 |0|_A(x1) = 0 |1|_A(x1) = 0 *_A(x1,x2) = 3 +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 4 +!_A(x1,x2) = 3 |#|!_A() = 5 |0|!_A(x1) = 1 |1|!_A(x1) = 4 *!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 2 partial status: pi(+#) = [1] pi(+) = [1] pi(|#|) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(|1|) = [] pi(*) = [] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains.