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) -> |#|()
  *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
  *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
  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: *#(|0|(x),y) -> |0|#(*(x,y))
p9: *#(|0|(x),y) -> *#(x,y)
p10: *#(|1|(x),y) -> +#(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
p11: *#(|1|(x),y) -> |0|#(*(x,y))
p12: *#(|1|(x),y) -> *#(x,y)
p13: sum#(nil()) -> |0|#(|#|())
p14: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> +#(x,sum(l))
p15: sum#(cons(x,l)) -> sum#(l)
p16: prod#(cons(x,l)) -> *#(x,prod(l))
p17: 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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p15}
  {p17}
  {p9, p12}
  {p2, p3, p4, p6, p7}


-- 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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r5, r6

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:
              sum#_A(x1) = x1
              cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 4
              |0|_A(x1) = 8
              |1|_A(x1) = 3
              sum#!_A(x1) = x1
              cons!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 3
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 4
              |0|!_A(x1) = 3
              |1|!_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:
              sum#_A(x1) = x1
              cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 6
              |0|_A(x1) = 12
              |1|_A(x1) = 5
              sum#!_A(x1) = 2
              cons!_A(x1,x2) = 3
              +!_A(x1,x2) = 4
              |0|!_A(x1) = 3
              |1|!_A(x1) = 2
        
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(sum#) = []
      pi(cons) = [2]
      pi(+) = [2]
      pi(|0|) = [1]
      pi(|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: 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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r5, r6

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:
              prod#_A(x1) = x1
              cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 4
              |0|_A(x1) = 8
              |1|_A(x1) = 3
              prod#!_A(x1) = x1
              cons!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 4
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 5
              |0|!_A(x1) = 4
              |1|!_A(x1) = 0
        
        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
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 8
              |0|_A(x1) = 16
              |1|_A(x1) = 7
              prod#!_A(x1) = 0
              cons!_A(x1,x2) = 4
              +!_A(x1,x2) = 8
              |0|!_A(x1) = 4
              |1|!_A(x1) = 1
        
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(prod#) = []
      pi(cons) = [2]
      pi(+) = [2]
      pi(|0|) = [1]
      pi(|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: *#(|1|(x),y) -> *#(x,y)
p2: *#(|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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r3

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:
              *#_A(x1,x2) = 0
              |1|_A(x1) = 6
              |0|_A(x1) = 19
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 6
              |#|_A() = 20
              *#!_A(x1,x2) = 11
              |1|!_A(x1) = x1 + 10
              |0|!_A(x1) = x1 + 17
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 3
              |#|!_A() = 0
        
        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
              |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 18
              |0|_A(x1) = x1 + 16
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 19
              |#|_A() = 8
              *#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 18
              |1|!_A(x1) = 17
              |0|!_A(x1) = 19
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x1
              |#|!_A() = 13
        
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(*#) = []
      pi(|1|) = []
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(+) = [2]
      pi(|#|) = []

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: +#(|0|(x),|0|(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p2: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p3: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))
p4: +#(|0|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(x,y)
p5: +#(|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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r8

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:
              +#_A(x1,x2) = 0
              |0|_A(x1) = x1 + 8
              |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 2
              +_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 4
              |#|_A() = 0
              *_A(x1,x2) = 3
              +#!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 9
              |0|!_A(x1) = 8
              |1|!_A(x1) = 2
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 1
              |#|!_A() = 0
              *!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 5
        
        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
              |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 4
              +_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2
              |#|_A() = 0
              *_A(x1,x2) = 9
              +#!_A(x1,x2) = 5
              |0|!_A(x1) = 0
              |1|!_A(x1) = 4
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 6
              |#|!_A() = 2
              *!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 3
        
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(+#) = []
      pi(|0|) = [1]
      pi(|1|) = []
      pi(+) = [1]
      pi(|#|) = []
      pi(*) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1, p2, p4, p5



-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))

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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: 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: +#(|1|(x),|1|(y)) -> +#(+(x,y),|1|(|#|()))

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) -> |#|()
r9: *(|0|(x),y) -> |0|(*(x,y))
r10: *(|1|(x),y) -> +(|0|(*(x,y)),y)
r11: sum(nil()) -> |0|(|#|())
r12: sum(cons(x,l)) -> +(x,sum(l))
r13: prod(nil()) -> |1|(|#|())
r14: prod(cons(x,l)) -> *(x,prod(l))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7

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:
              +#_A(x1,x2) = x2
              |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 4
              +_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2
              |#|_A() = 0
              |0|_A(x1) = x1
              +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2
              |1|!_A(x1) = 7
              +!_A(x1,x2) = 7
              |#|!_A() = 0
              |0|!_A(x1) = 6
        
        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
              |1|_A(x1) = 9
              +_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
              |#|_A() = 6
              |0|_A(x1) = 6
              +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1
              |1|!_A(x1) = 19
              +!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 10
              |#|!_A() = 0
              |0|!_A(x1) = 17
        
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(+#) = []
      pi(|1|) = []
      pi(+) = [1, 2]
      pi(|#|) = []
      pi(|0|) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.