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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
  minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
  if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
  if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(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),y) -> if_minus#(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
p3: minus#(s(x),y) -> le#(s(x),y)
p4: if_minus#(false(),s(x),y) -> minus#(x,y)
p5: mod#(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod#(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
p6: mod#(s(x),s(y)) -> le#(y,x)
p7: if_mod#(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod#(minus(x,y),s(y))
p8: 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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r5: minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
r6: if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
r7: if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(minus(x,y))
r8: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r9: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|()
r10: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
r11: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y))
r12: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x)

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p5, p7}
  {p2, p4}
  {p1}


-- 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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r5: minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
r6: if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
r7: if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(minus(x,y))
r8: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r9: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|()
r10: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
r11: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y))
r12: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r12

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 + x3
          true_A() = 6
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 5
          mod#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
          minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 3
          le_A(x1,x2) = 1
          |0|_A() = 3
          if_minus_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 3
          false_A() = 2
          mod_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 3
          if_mod_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + x3
  
    base order 2:
  
      precedence:
      
        if_mod > mod# = minus > if_mod# = if_minus > s = mod > le > true > |0| > false
      
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(if_mod#) = []
      pi(true) = []
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(mod#) = [1]
      pi(minus) = []
      pi(le) = []
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(if_minus) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(mod) = []
      pi(if_mod) = [2, 3]

The following rules are removed:

  p1



-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: 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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r5: minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
r6: if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
r7: if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(minus(x,y))
r8: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r9: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|()
r10: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
r11: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y))
r12: 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: if_minus#(false(),s(x),y) -> minus#(x,y)
p2: minus#(s(x),y) -> if_minus#(le(s(x),y),s(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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r5: minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
r6: if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
r7: if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(minus(x,y))
r8: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r9: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|()
r10: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
r11: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y))
r12: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r6, r8, r9, r12

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_minus#_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 1
          false_A() = 1
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 5
          minus#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 2
          le_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 4
          |0|_A() = 2
          true_A() = 3
          minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 7
          if_minus_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 1
          mod_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
          if_mod_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + x3 + 2
  
    base order 2:
  
      precedence:
      
        mod > if_minus# = if_mod > minus# = minus > le > s = if_minus > true > |0| > false
      
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(if_minus#) = [2]
      pi(false) = []
      pi(s) = []
      pi(minus#) = []
      pi(le) = []
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(true) = []
      pi(minus) = [2]
      pi(if_minus) = [2]
      pi(mod) = [1]
      pi(if_mod) = [3]

The following rules are removed:

  p1



-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: minus#(s(x),y) -> if_minus#(le(s(x),y),s(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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r5: minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
r6: if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
r7: if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(minus(x,y))
r8: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r9: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|()
r10: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
r11: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y))
r12: 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(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r5: minus(s(x),y) -> if_minus(le(s(x),y),s(x),y)
r6: if_minus(true(),s(x),y) -> |0|()
r7: if_minus(false(),s(x),y) -> s(minus(x,y))
r8: mod(|0|(),y) -> |0|()
r9: mod(s(x),|0|()) -> |0|()
r10: mod(s(x),s(y)) -> if_mod(le(y,x),s(x),s(y))
r11: if_mod(true(),s(x),s(y)) -> mod(minus(x,y),s(y))
r12: if_mod(false(),s(x),s(y)) -> s(x)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r6, r8, r9, r12

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
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 4
          le_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 6
          |0|_A() = 2
          true_A() = 1
          false_A() = 1
          minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 7
          if_minus_A(x1,x2,x3) = 3
          mod_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
          if_mod_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + x3
  
    base order 2:
  
      precedence:
      
        if_minus = if_mod > minus > le# = le > s > mod > |0| = true > false
      
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(le#) = [1]
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(le) = []
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(true) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(minus) = [1]
      pi(if_minus) = []
      pi(mod) = []
      pi(if_mod) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.