YES We show the termination of the TRS R: cond(true(),x,y) -> cond(gr(x,y),p(x),s(y)) gr(|0|(),x) -> false() gr(s(x),|0|()) -> true() gr(s(x),s(y)) -> gr(x,y) p(|0|()) -> |0|() p(s(x)) -> x -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: cond#(true(),x,y) -> cond#(gr(x,y),p(x),s(y)) p2: cond#(true(),x,y) -> gr#(x,y) p3: cond#(true(),x,y) -> p#(x) p4: gr#(s(x),s(y)) -> gr#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: cond(true(),x,y) -> cond(gr(x,y),p(x),s(y)) r2: gr(|0|(),x) -> false() r3: gr(s(x),|0|()) -> true() r4: gr(s(x),s(y)) -> gr(x,y) r5: p(|0|()) -> |0|() r6: p(s(x)) -> x The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} {p4} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: cond#(true(),x,y) -> cond#(gr(x,y),p(x),s(y)) and R consists of: r1: cond(true(),x,y) -> cond(gr(x,y),p(x),s(y)) r2: gr(|0|(),x) -> false() r3: gr(s(x),|0|()) -> true() r4: gr(s(x),s(y)) -> gr(x,y) r5: p(|0|()) -> |0|() r6: p(s(x)) -> x The set of usable rules consists of r2, r3, r4, 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: cond#_A(x1,x2,x3) = x3 true_A() = 1 gr_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 2 p_A(x1) = x1 + 1 s_A(x1) = x1 |0|_A() = 1 false_A() = 0 cond#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = 3 true!_A() = 2 gr!_A(x1,x2) = 1 p!_A(x1) = 6 s!_A(x1) = 4 |0|!_A() = 3 false!_A() = 0 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: cond#_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{0, x1 - 26, x2 - 13} true_A = 15 gr_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 3} p_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 1} s_A(x1) = max{18, x1 + 1} |0|_A = 2 false_A = 1 cond#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 8, x2 + 4} true!_A = 9 gr!_A(x1,x2) = 8 p!_A(x1) = max{3, x1 - 3} s!_A(x1) = max{10, x1 - 20} |0|!_A = 2 false!_A = 1 partial status: pi(cond#) = [] pi(true) = [] pi(gr) = [1, 2] pi(p) = [1] pi(s) = [1] pi(|0|) = [] pi(false) = [] 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: gr#(s(x),s(y)) -> gr#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: cond(true(),x,y) -> cond(gr(x,y),p(x),s(y)) r2: gr(|0|(),x) -> false() r3: gr(s(x),|0|()) -> true() r4: gr(s(x),s(y)) -> gr(x,y) r5: p(|0|()) -> |0|() r6: p(s(x)) -> x 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: gr#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 gr#!_A(x1,x2) = 2 s!_A(x1) = 2 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: gr#_A(x1,x2) = max{x1, x2} s_A(x1) = max{10, x1 + 1} gr#!_A(x1,x2) = max{7, x2 - 2} s!_A(x1) = x1 + 8 partial status: pi(gr#) = [] pi(s) = [] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains.