YES We show the termination of the TRS R: f(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x) f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(|0|(),|1|(),z)) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f#(s(x),x,x) p2: f#(x,y,s(z)) -> f#(|0|(),|1|(),z) and R consists of: r1: f(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x) r2: f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(|0|(),|1|(),z)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f#(s(x),x,x) p2: f#(x,y,s(z)) -> f#(|0|(),|1|(),z) and R consists of: r1: f(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x) r2: f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(|0|(),|1|(),z)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G) base order 1: trivial reduction triple (T x T, T x T, Φ) base order 2: lexicographic combination of reduction triples: 1. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1,x2,x3) = x3 |0|_A() = 1 |1|_A() = 1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 2 f#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = 3 |0|!_A() = 4 |1|!_A() = 4 s!_A(x1) = 2 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1,x2,x3) = x3 |0|_A() = 1 |1|_A() = 1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 2 f#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = x3 + 3 |0|!_A() = 2 |1|!_A() = 4 s!_A(x1) = 1 partial status: pi(f#) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(|1|) = [] pi(s) = [] The following rules are removed: p2 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f#(s(x),x,x) and R consists of: r1: f(|0|(),|1|(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x) r2: f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(|0|(),|1|(),z)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: (no SCCs)