YES
We show the termination of the TRS R:

  +(x,|0|()) -> x
  +(|0|(),x) -> x
  +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
  +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
  *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
  *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
  *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
  *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
  sum(nil()) -> |0|()
  sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
  prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
  prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))


-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: +#(s(x),s(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p2: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(x,+(y,z))
p3: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(y,z)
p4: *#(s(x),s(y)) -> +#(*(x,y),+(x,y))
p5: *#(s(x),s(y)) -> *#(x,y)
p6: *#(s(x),s(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p7: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(x,*(y,z))
p8: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(y,z)
p9: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> +#(x,sum(l))
p10: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> sum#(l)
p11: prod#(cons(x,l)) -> *#(x,prod(l))
p12: prod#(cons(x,l)) -> prod#(l)

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p10}
  {p12}
  {p5, p7, p8}
  {p1, p2, p3}


-- 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: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: 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) = 0
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{9, x1 - 4, x2 - 3}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          sum#_A(x1) = x1
          cons_A(x1,x2) = max{39, x1 + 36, x2 + 36}
          sum#!_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 37}
          cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 13, x2 - 13}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(sum#) = []
      pi(cons) = []

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: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: 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) = 1
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{14, x1 - 3, x2 - 2}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          prod#_A(x1) = x1
          cons_A(x1,x2) = max{39, x1 + 36, x2 + 36}
          prod#!_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 37}
          cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 10, x2 - 36}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(prod#) = []
      pi(cons) = []

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

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r5, r6

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        *#_A(x1,x2) = 1
        *_A(x1,x2) = max{9, x1 + 5, x2 - 10}
        s_A(x1) = 6
        +_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1, x2}
        |0|_A = 6
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          *#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 5}
          *_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 + 1, x2}
          s_A(x1) = max{2, x1}
          +_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1, x2 - 1}
          |0|_A = 13
          *#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 8
          *!_A(x1,x2) = max{6, x1 - 14, x2 - 20}
          s!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 26}
          +!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 6, x2 - 13}
          |0|!_A = 3
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(*#) = []
      pi(*) = []
      pi(s) = []
      pi(+) = [1, 2]
      pi(|0|) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p2



-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(y,z)
p2: *#(s(x),s(y)) -> *#(x,y)

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p1, p2}


-- Reduction pair.

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

p1: *#(*(x,y),z) -> *#(y,z)
p2: *#(s(x),s(y)) -> *#(x,y)

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: 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:
      
        *#_A(x1,x2) = max{16, x1 + 8}
        *_A(x1,x2) = max{29, x1 + 15, x2 + 15}
        s_A(x1) = max{26, x1 + 9}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          *#_A(x1,x2) = 0
          *_A(x1,x2) = max{16, x1 - 32, x2 - 32}
          s_A(x1) = max{17, x1 - 33}
          *#!_A(x1,x2) = 1
          *!_A(x1,x2) = max{4, x1 - 41, x2 - 99}
          s!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 113}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(*#) = [1]
      pi(*) = [1, 2]
      pi(s) = [1]

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: +#(s(x),s(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p2: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(y,z)
p3: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(x,+(y,z))

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        +#_A(x1,x2) = 26
        s_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 26}
        +_A(x1,x2) = max{25, x1 + 4, x2}
        |0|_A = 9
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          +#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 20, x2 - 23}
          s_A(x1) = max{4, x1}
          +_A(x1,x2) = max{19, x1 + 3, x2}
          |0|_A = 4
          +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 4
          s!_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 36}
          +!_A(x1,x2) = max{24, x1 - 20, x2 - 40}
          |0|!_A = 0
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(+#) = []
      pi(s) = []
      pi(+) = [1, 2]
      pi(|0|) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p3



-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: +#(s(x),s(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p2: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(y,z)

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p1, p2}


-- Reduction pair.

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

p1: +#(s(x),s(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p2: +#(+(x,y),z) -> +#(y,z)

and R consists of:

r1: +(x,|0|()) -> x
r2: +(|0|(),x) -> x
r3: +(s(x),s(y)) -> s(s(+(x,y)))
r4: +(+(x,y),z) -> +(x,+(y,z))
r5: *(x,|0|()) -> |0|()
r6: *(|0|(),x) -> |0|()
r7: *(s(x),s(y)) -> s(+(*(x,y),+(x,y)))
r8: *(*(x,y),z) -> *(x,*(y,z))
r9: sum(nil()) -> |0|()
r10: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r11: prod(nil()) -> s(|0|())
r12: 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:
      
        +#_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 2
        s_A(x1) = x1 + 3
        +_A(x1,x2) = max{20, x1 - 28, x2 - 28}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          +#_A(x1,x2) = 0
          s_A(x1) = max{5, x1 - 6}
          +_A(x1,x2) = max{4, x1 - 14, x2 + 1}
          +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 16
          s!_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 32}
          +!_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 47, x2 - 17}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(+#) = [2]
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(+) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1, p2

Then no dependency pair remains.