YES We show the termination of the TRS R: le(|0|(),y) -> true() le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) minus(x,|0|()) -> x minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y) mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|() mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|() mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y)) if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: le#(s(x),s(y)) -> le#(x,y) p2: minus#(s(x),s(y)) -> minus#(x,y) p3: mod#(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod#(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) p4: mod#(s(x),s(y)) -> le#(y,x) p5: if_mod#(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod#(minus(x,y),s(y)) p6: if_mod#(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> minus#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r2: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r3: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r4: minus(x,|0|()) -> x r5: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y) r6: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|() r7: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|() r8: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) r9: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y)) r10: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p3, p5} {p1} {p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: if_mod#(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod#(minus(x,y),s(y)) p2: mod#(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod#(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) and R consists of: r1: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r2: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r3: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r4: minus(x,|0|()) -> x r5: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y) r6: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|() r7: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|() r8: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) r9: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y)) r10: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r10 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >MG) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: if_mod#_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 1 true_A() = 1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 3 mod#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 2 minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 2 le_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 1 |0|_A() = 2 false_A() = 1 mod_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2 if_mod_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + x3 base order 2: precedence: |0| > mod > s > if_mod# > mod# = minus > le = if_mod > true = false partial status: pi(if_mod#) = [] pi(true) = [] pi(s) = [1] pi(mod#) = [] pi(minus) = [] pi(le) = [1] pi(|0|) = [] pi(false) = [] pi(mod) = [2] pi(if_mod) = [2] The following rules are removed: p2 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: if_mod#(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod#(minus(x,y),s(y)) and R consists of: r1: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r2: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r3: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r4: minus(x,|0|()) -> x r5: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y) r6: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|() r7: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|() r8: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) r9: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y)) r10: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: (no SCCs) -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: le#(s(x),s(y)) -> le#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r2: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r3: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r4: minus(x,|0|()) -> x r5: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y) r6: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|() r7: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|() r8: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) r9: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y)) r10: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r10 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >MG) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: le#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 6 s_A(x1) = x1 + 5 le_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 4 |0|_A() = 2 true_A() = 4 false_A() = 1 minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 6 mod_A(x1,x2) = 3 if_mod_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + x3 base order 2: precedence: true > le > le# = mod = if_mod > minus > s > |0| > false partial status: pi(le#) = [1] pi(s) = [] pi(le) = [1, 2] pi(|0|) = [] pi(true) = [] pi(false) = [] pi(minus) = [2] pi(mod) = [] pi(if_mod) = [3] 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: minus#(s(x),s(y)) -> minus#(x,y) and R consists of: r1: le(|0|(),y) -> true() r2: le(s(x),|0|()) -> false() r3: le(s(x),s(y)) -> le(x,y) r4: minus(x,|0|()) -> x r5: minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y) r6: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|() r7: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|() r8: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y)) r9: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y)) r10: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r10 Take the reduction pair: generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >MG) base order 1: matrix interpretation with standard point-wise order: carrier: N^1 order: standard order interpretations: minus#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 6 s_A(x1) = x1 + 5 le_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 4 |0|_A() = 2 true_A() = 4 false_A() = 1 minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 6 mod_A(x1,x2) = 3 if_mod_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + x3 base order 2: precedence: true > le > minus# = mod = if_mod > minus > s > |0| > false partial status: pi(minus#) = [1] pi(s) = [] pi(le) = [1, 2] pi(|0|) = [] pi(true) = [] pi(false) = [] pi(minus) = [2] pi(mod) = [] pi(if_mod) = [3] The following rules are removed: p1 Then no dependency pair remains.