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 (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!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: sum#_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 9, x2 + 7} sum#!_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 5} cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 1, x2 - 7} 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 sum#!_A(x1) = x1 cons!_A(x1,x2) = 9 partial status: pi(sum#) = [1] pi(cons) = [2] 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 (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!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: prod#_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 12, x2 + 1} prod#!_A(x1) = 19 cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 19, x2 - 10} 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 prod#!_A(x1) = 1 cons!_A(x1,x2) = 1 partial status: pi(prod#) = [1] pi(cons) = [2] 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 (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!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: *#_A(x1,x2) = 0 |1|_A(x1) = max{72, x1 - 67} |0|_A(x1) = max{64, x1 - 70} *#!_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 114 |1|!_A(x1) = 9 |0|!_A(x1) = max{112, x1 + 8} 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) = x1 |0|_A(x1) = x1 + 6 *#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 18 |1|!_A(x1) = 16 |0|!_A(x1) = 17 partial status: pi(*#) = [2] pi(|1|) = [1] pi(|0|) = [] The following rules are removed: p2 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: *#(|1|(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 estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: *#(|1|(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 (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!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: *#_A(x1,x2) = 0 |1|_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 7} *#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 30 |1|!_A(x1) = x1 + 30 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) = 5 *#!_A(x1,x2) = 8 |1|!_A(x1) = 8 partial status: pi(*#) = [1] pi(|1|) = [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: +#(|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, 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!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: +#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 45, x2 - 22} |0|_A(x1) = max{9, x1} |1|_A(x1) = max{3, x1} +_A(x1,x2) = max{23, x1, x2 + 2} |#|_A = 21 +#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 |0|!_A(x1) = 7 |1|!_A(x1) = max{10, x1 - 34} +!_A(x1,x2) = max{10, x1 + 1, x2 - 10} |#|!_A = 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) = x1 + x2 |0|_A(x1) = x1 + 3 |1|_A(x1) = x1 + 5 +_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2 |#|_A() = 0 +#!_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 3 |0|!_A(x1) = 2 |1|!_A(x1) = 14 +!_A(x1,x2) = 15 |#|!_A() = 0 partial status: pi(+#) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(|1|) = [] pi(+) = [1, 2] pi(|#|) = [] The following rules are removed: p1, p2, p3, p4, p5 Then no dependency pair remains.