YES We show the termination of the TRS R: app(app(plus(),|0|()),y) -> y app(app(plus(),app(s(),x)),y) -> app(s(),app(app(plus(),x),y)) app(app(times(),|0|()),y) -> |0|() app(app(times(),app(s(),x)),y) -> app(app(plus(),app(app(times(),x),y)),y) app(app(app(curry(),g),x),y) -> app(app(g,x),y) app(app(map(),f),nil()) -> nil() app(app(map(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(cons(),app(f,x)),app(app(map(),f),xs)) inc() -> app(map(),app(app(curry(),plus()),app(s(),|0|()))) double() -> app(map(),app(app(curry(),times()),app(s(),app(s(),|0|())))) Instead we prove termination of the uncurried system: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3#(x1,x2,y) p2: app#(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2#(x1,y) p3: app#(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2#(x1,y) p4: app#(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2#(x1,y) p5: plus_2#(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2#(x,y) p6: times_2#(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2#(times_2(x,y),y) p7: times_2#(s_1(x),y) -> times_2#(x,y) p8: curry_3#(g,x,y) -> app#(app(g,x),y) p9: curry_3#(g,x,y) -> app#(g,x) p10: map_2#(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(f,x) p11: map_2#(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(f,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2, p8, p9, p10, p11} {p7} {p5} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3#(x1,x2,y) p2: curry_3#(g,x,y) -> app#(g,x) p3: app#(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2#(x1,y) p4: map_2#(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(f,xs) p5: map_2#(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> app#(f,x) p6: curry_3#(g,x,y) -> app#(app(g,x),y) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18, r19 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: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 87, x2 - 79} curry_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 7, x2 + 86} curry_3#_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{0, x1 - 87, x2 - 1, x3 - 79} map_1_A(x1) = x1 + 70 map_2#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 17, x2 - 79} cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{11, x1 + 7, x2} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 79, x2 + 86} cons_0_A = 75 cons_1_A(x1) = x1 + 86 curry_0_A = 73 curry_1_A(x1) = x1 + 86 curry_3_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 158, x2 + 7, x3 + 86} map_0_A = 78 map_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 72, x2 + 86} plus_0_A = 131 plus_1_A(x1) = x1 + 71 plus_2_A(x1,x2) = max{11, x2 + 10} s_0_A = 66 s_1_A(x1) = 11 times_0_A = 144 times_1_A(x1) = max{66, x1 + 54} times_2_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 24 |0|_0_A = 24 nil_0_A = 11 app#!_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 62, x2 + 5} curry_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{12, x1 - 132, x2 - 42} curry_3#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 56, x2 + 24, x3 + 5} map_1!_A(x1) = max{10, x1 - 128} map_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 61, x2 - 1} cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 92} app!_A(x1,x2) = max{6, x1 - 67, x2 + 4} cons_0!_A = 8 cons_1!_A(x1) = 7 curry_0!_A = 6 curry_1!_A(x1) = max{5, x1 - 131} curry_3!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 146, x2 + 19, x3 + 4} map_0!_A = 11 map_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 66, x2 - 12} plus_0!_A = 8 plus_1!_A(x1) = max{7, x1 - 1} plus_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x2 + 3} s_0!_A = 1 s_1!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 12} times_0!_A = 2 times_1!_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 24} times_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 23, x2 + 3} |0|_0!_A = 2 nil_0!_A = 3 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 31, x2 - 29} curry_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1, x2 + 30} curry_3#_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{0, x1 - 31, x2 - 1, x3 - 29} map_1_A(x1) = max{20, x1 + 9} map_2#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 22, x2 - 29} cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 9, x2} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 21, x2 + 30} cons_0_A = 0 cons_1_A(x1) = x1 + 30 curry_0_A = 20 curry_1_A(x1) = x1 + 22 curry_3_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 21, x2 + 9, x3 + 30} map_0_A = 0 map_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 12, x2 + 30} plus_0_A = 10 plus_1_A(x1) = x1 + 20 plus_2_A(x1,x2) = max{10, x1 - 50, x2 + 1} s_0_A = 20 s_1_A(x1) = max{10, x1 - 50} times_0_A = 20 times_1_A(x1) = max{20, x1 - 33} times_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 54, x2 + 10} |0|_0_A = 0 nil_0_A = 5 app#!_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x2 + 1} curry_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 11, x2 - 1} curry_3#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{2, x3 + 1} map_1!_A(x1) = max{25, x1 + 19} map_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{26, x2 - 6} cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 1, x2 - 31} app!_A(x1,x2) = 0 cons_0!_A = 1 cons_1!_A(x1) = 0 curry_0!_A = 2 curry_1!_A(x1) = max{1, x1 - 12} curry_3!_A(x1,x2,x3) = 0 map_0!_A = 1 map_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{26, x2 - 10} plus_0!_A = 1 plus_1!_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 1} plus_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x2 + 3} s_0!_A = 1 s_1!_A(x1) = 4 times_0!_A = 1 times_1!_A(x1) = max{2, x1 - 12} times_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 11, x2 + 6} |0|_0!_A = 7 nil_0!_A = 1 partial status: pi(app#) = [] pi(curry_2) = [] pi(curry_3#) = [] pi(map_1) = [] pi(map_2#) = [] pi(cons_2) = [] pi(app) = [2] pi(cons_0) = [] pi(cons_1) = [] pi(curry_0) = [] pi(curry_1) = [1] pi(curry_3) = [3] pi(map_0) = [] pi(map_2) = [2] pi(plus_0) = [] pi(plus_1) = [1] pi(plus_2) = [2] pi(s_0) = [] pi(s_1) = [] pi(times_0) = [] pi(times_1) = [1] pi(times_2) = [2] pi(|0|_0) = [] pi(nil_0) = [] The following rules are removed: p2, p3, p5 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3#(x1,x2,y) p2: map_2#(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(f,xs) p3: curry_3#(g,x,y) -> app#(app(g,x),y) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p3} {p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3#(x1,x2,y) p2: curry_3#(g,x,y) -> app#(app(g,x),y) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18, r19 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: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{12, x1 - 9, x2 - 2} curry_2_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 20 curry_3#_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{12, x2 + 11, x3 - 2} app_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 20 cons_0_A = 8 cons_1_A(x1) = x1 + 8 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = 20 curry_0_A = 8 curry_1_A(x1) = x1 + 20 curry_3_A(x1,x2,x3) = x3 + 20 map_0_A = 8 map_1_A(x1) = max{9, x1 + 4} map_2_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 20 plus_0_A = 4 plus_1_A(x1) = x1 + 8 plus_2_A(x1,x2) = max{16, x2 + 11} s_0_A = 2 s_1_A(x1) = max{16, x1 - 5} times_0_A = 4 times_1_A(x1) = x1 + 8 times_2_A(x1,x2) = max{16, x2 + 15} |0|_0_A = 16 nil_0_A = 19 app#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 curry_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{16, x1 + 10} curry_3#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = x1 + 9 app!_A(x1,x2) = max{8, x1 - 3} cons_0!_A = 0 cons_1!_A(x1) = 0 cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = 0 curry_0!_A = 1 curry_1!_A(x1) = 0 curry_3!_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 17 map_0!_A = 1 map_1!_A(x1) = 6 map_2!_A(x1,x2) = 0 plus_0!_A = 1 plus_1!_A(x1) = 2 plus_2!_A(x1,x2) = 6 s_0!_A = 5 s_1!_A(x1) = 4 times_0!_A = 2 times_1!_A(x1) = 1 times_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{7, x1 - 17} |0|_0!_A = 1 nil_0!_A = 0 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 16, x2 - 16} curry_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 6, x2 + 15} curry_3#_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{0, x1 - 16, x2 - 1, x3 - 16} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 8, x2 + 15} cons_0_A = 2 cons_1_A(x1) = x1 + 4 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = 0 curry_0_A = 4 curry_1_A(x1) = x1 + 14 curry_3_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 - 16, x2 + 7, x3 + 15} map_0_A = 0 map_1_A(x1) = x1 + 7 map_2_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 1, x2 + 15} plus_0_A = 9 plus_1_A(x1) = max{15, x1 + 7} plus_2_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 1, x2 + 1} s_0_A = 4 s_1_A(x1) = x1 times_0_A = 9 times_1_A(x1) = x1 + 4 times_2_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x2 + 1} |0|_0_A = 0 nil_0_A = 0 app#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 curry_2!_A(x1,x2) = 10 curry_3#!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{3, x1 - 2, x3 - 1} app!_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 3} cons_0!_A = 1 cons_1!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 1} cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = 2 curry_0!_A = 1 curry_1!_A(x1) = 0 curry_3!_A(x1,x2,x3) = max{x1 + 1, x2 + 12} map_0!_A = 1 map_1!_A(x1) = 2 map_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 5} plus_0!_A = 10 plus_1!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 1} plus_2!_A(x1,x2) = 3 s_0!_A = 1 s_1!_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 3} times_0!_A = 1 times_1!_A(x1) = 6 times_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{7, x1 - 4, x2 - 1} |0|_0!_A = 8 nil_0!_A = 1 partial status: pi(app#) = [1] pi(curry_2) = [2] pi(curry_3#) = [2] pi(app) = [2] pi(cons_0) = [] pi(cons_1) = [1] pi(cons_2) = [] pi(curry_0) = [] pi(curry_1) = [] pi(curry_3) = [3] pi(map_0) = [] pi(map_1) = [1] pi(map_2) = [] pi(plus_0) = [] pi(plus_1) = [] pi(plus_2) = [2] pi(s_0) = [] pi(s_1) = [] pi(times_0) = [] pi(times_1) = [] pi(times_2) = [2] pi(|0|_0) = [] pi(nil_0) = [] 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: map_2#(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> map_2#(f,xs) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) 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: map_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 3, x2 - 3} map_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x2 - 15} cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 16, x2 - 14} 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: map_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 cons_2_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 3, x2 - 3} map_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 - 1, x2 - 25} cons_2!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 26, x2 - 24} partial status: pi(map_2#) = [2] pi(cons_2) = [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: times_2#(s_1(x),y) -> times_2#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) 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: times_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 6} times_2#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 53} 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: times_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 6} times_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 5, x2 - 1} s_1!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 24} partial status: pi(times_2#) = [1] pi(s_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: plus_2#(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: app(cons_0(),y) -> cons_1(y) r2: app(cons_1(x1),y) -> cons_2(x1,y) r3: app(curry_0(),y) -> curry_1(y) r4: app(curry_1(x1),y) -> curry_2(x1,y) r5: app(curry_2(x1,x2),y) -> curry_3(x1,x2,y) r6: app(map_0(),y) -> map_1(y) r7: app(map_1(x1),y) -> map_2(x1,y) r8: app(plus_0(),y) -> plus_1(y) r9: app(plus_1(x1),y) -> plus_2(x1,y) r10: app(s_0(),y) -> s_1(y) r11: app(times_0(),y) -> times_1(y) r12: app(times_1(x1),y) -> times_2(x1,y) r13: plus_2(|0|_0(),y) -> y r14: plus_2(s_1(x),y) -> s_1(plus_2(x,y)) r15: times_2(|0|_0(),y) -> |0|_0() r16: times_2(s_1(x),y) -> plus_2(times_2(x,y),y) r17: curry_3(g,x,y) -> app(app(g,x),y) r18: map_2(f,nil_0()) -> nil_0() r19: map_2(f,cons_2(x,xs)) -> cons_2(app(f,x),map_2(f,xs)) r20: inc_0() -> map_1(curry_2(plus_0(),s_1(|0|_0()))) r21: double_0() -> map_1(curry_2(times_0(),s_1(s_1(|0|_0())))) 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: plus_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1_A(x1) = max{6, x1 - 8} plus_2#!_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 30} 2. marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!): max/plus interpretation on natural numbers: plus_2#_A(x1,x2) = 0 s_1_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 6} plus_2#!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 17, x2 - 1} s_1!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 17} partial status: pi(plus_2#) = [1] pi(s_1) = [1] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains.