YES
We show the termination of the TRS R:

  minus(x,|0|()) -> x
  minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
  double(|0|()) -> |0|()
  double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
  plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
  plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
  plus(zero(),y) -> y
  plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
  id(x) -> x
  if(true(),x,y) -> x
  if(false(),x,y) -> y
  not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
  gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
  gt(zero(),y) -> false()
  gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(x,y)


-- SCC decomposition.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: minus#(s(x),s(y)) -> minus#(x,y)
p2: double#(s(x)) -> double#(x)
p3: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> plus#(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))
p4: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> if#(gt(x,y),x,y)
p5: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> gt#(x,y)
p6: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> if#(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y))
p7: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> not#(gt(x,y))
p8: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> id#(x)
p9: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> id#(y)
p10: plus#(s(x),x) -> plus#(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
p11: plus#(s(x),x) -> if#(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x))
p12: plus#(s(x),x) -> gt#(x,x)
p13: plus#(s(x),x) -> id#(x)
p14: plus#(id(x),s(y)) -> plus#(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y)))
p15: plus#(id(x),s(y)) -> if#(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))
p16: plus#(id(x),s(y)) -> gt#(s(y),y)
p17: not#(x) -> if#(x,false(),true())
p18: gt#(s(x),s(y)) -> gt#(x,y)

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(x,y)

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p1}
  {p2}
  {p3, p10, p14}
  {p18}


-- Reduction pair.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: minus#(s(x),s(y)) -> minus#(x,y)

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(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:
      
        minus#_A(x1,x2) = 0
        s_A(x1) = max{21, x1 - 23}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          minus#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 50, x2 - 50}
          s_A(x1) = max{105, x1 + 49}
          minus#!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 99, x2 - 124}
          s!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 123}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(minus#) = []
      pi(s) = []

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: double#(s(x)) -> double#(x)

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(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:
      
        double#_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 13}
        s_A(x1) = max{20, x1 + 12}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          double#_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 93}
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 92
          double#!_A(x1) = max{32, x1 - 93}
          s!_A(x1) = max{125, x1 + 31}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(double#) = []
      pi(s) = []

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: plus#(s(x),s(y)) -> plus#(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))
p2: plus#(id(x),s(y)) -> plus#(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y)))
p3: plus#(s(x),x) -> plus#(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(x,y)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        plus#_A(x1,x2) = max{6, x1 - 253, x2 - 261}
        s_A(x1) = max{260, x1 + 23}
        if_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{60, x1 - 84, x2 + 9, x3}
        gt_A(x1,x2) = max{98, x1 - 53, x2 - 282}
        not_A(x1) = max{60, x1 - 84}
        id_A(x1) = max{225, x1 + 5}
        true_A = 24
        false_A = 51
        zero_A = 52
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          plus#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 19, x2 - 19}
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 2
          if_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 14, x2, x3}
          gt_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 5, x2 - 3}
          not_A(x1) = max{17, x1 - 4}
          id_A(x1) = max{18, x1}
          true_A = 1
          false_A = 1
          zero_A = 2
          plus#!_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 45, x2 - 19}
          s!_A(x1) = 2
          if!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{4, x1 - 3, x2 - 60, x3 - 13}
          gt!_A(x1,x2) = max{4, x1 - 12, x2 - 3}
          not!_A(x1) = max{5, x1 - 2}
          id!_A(x1) = 2
          true!_A = 1
          false!_A = 4
          zero!_A = 5
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(plus#) = []
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(if) = [3]
      pi(gt) = []
      pi(not) = []
      pi(id) = []
      pi(true) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(zero) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1, p3



-- SCC decomposition.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: plus#(id(x),s(y)) -> plus#(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y)))

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(x,y)

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p1}


-- Reduction pair.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: plus#(id(x),s(y)) -> plus#(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y)))

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(x,y)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r10, r11, r13, r14, r15

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        plus#_A(x1,x2) = 1
        id_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 17}
        s_A(x1) = max{4, x1}
        if_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 2, x2 + 14, x3 + 8}
        gt_A(x1,x2) = max{13, x1 - 5, x2 + 1}
        true_A = 0
        false_A = 0
        zero_A = 1
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          plus#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 88, x2 - 69}
          id_A(x1) = x1 + 8
          s_A(x1) = max{34, x1 + 10}
          if_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{68, x1 - 1, x2 + 10, x3}
          gt_A(x1,x2) = max{11, x1 - 43, x2 - 59}
          true_A = 11
          false_A = 11
          zero_A = 0
          plus#!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 4}
          id!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 58}
          s!_A(x1) = max{5, x1 - 70}
          if!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{6, x1 - 129, x2 - 107, x3 - 101}
          gt!_A(x1,x2) = max{6, x1 - 127, x2 - 60}
          true!_A = 0
          false!_A = 0
          zero!_A = 1
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(plus#) = []
      pi(id) = []
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(if) = [2, 3]
      pi(gt) = [2]
      pi(true) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(zero) = []

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: gt#(s(x),s(y)) -> gt#(x,y)

and R consists of:

r1: minus(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
r3: double(|0|()) -> |0|()
r4: double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
r5: plus(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(plus(if(gt(x,y),x,y),if(not(gt(x,y)),id(x),id(y)))))
r6: plus(s(x),x) -> plus(if(gt(x,x),id(x),id(x)),s(x))
r7: plus(zero(),y) -> y
r8: plus(id(x),s(y)) -> s(plus(x,if(gt(s(y),y),y,s(y))))
r9: id(x) -> x
r10: if(true(),x,y) -> x
r11: if(false(),x,y) -> y
r12: not(x) -> if(x,false(),true())
r13: gt(s(x),zero()) -> true()
r14: gt(zero(),y) -> false()
r15: gt(s(x),s(y)) -> gt(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:
      
        gt#_A(x1,x2) = 0
        s_A(x1) = max{5, x1 - 7}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          gt#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 89, x2 - 89}
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 88
          gt#!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 82, x2 - 89}
          s!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 93}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(gt#) = []
      pi(s) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.