YES We show the termination of the TRS R: app(app(F(),app(app(F(),f),x)),x) -> app(app(F(),app(G(),app(app(F(),f),x))),app(f,x)) Instead we prove termination of the uncurried system: app(F_0(),y) -> F_1(y) app(F_1(x1),y) -> F_2(x1,y) app(G_0(),y) -> G_1(y) F_2(F_2(f,x),x) -> F_2(G_1(F_2(f,x)),app(f,x)) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(F_1(x1),y) -> F_2#(x1,y) p2: F_2#(F_2(f,x),x) -> F_2#(G_1(F_2(f,x)),app(f,x)) p3: F_2#(F_2(f,x),x) -> app#(f,x) and R consists of: r1: app(F_0(),y) -> F_1(y) r2: app(F_1(x1),y) -> F_2(x1,y) r3: app(G_0(),y) -> G_1(y) r4: F_2(F_2(f,x),x) -> F_2(G_1(F_2(f,x)),app(f,x)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p3} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(F_1(x1),y) -> F_2#(x1,y) p2: F_2#(F_2(f,x),x) -> app#(f,x) and R consists of: r1: app(F_0(),y) -> F_1(y) r2: app(F_1(x1),y) -> F_2(x1,y) r3: app(G_0(),y) -> G_1(y) r4: F_2(F_2(f,x),x) -> F_2(G_1(F_2(f,x)),app(f,x)) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r3 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: app#_A(x1,x2) = x1 F_1_A(x1) = x1 + 2 F_2#_A(x1,x2) = x1 F_2_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 4 app_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 3 F_0_A() = 1 G_0_A() = 1 G_1_A(x1) = x1 base order 2: precedence: F_2 > F_2# = app > app# = F_1 = G_1 > F_0 = G_0 partial status: pi(app#) = [] pi(F_1) = [1] pi(F_2#) = [1] pi(F_2) = [2] pi(app) = [] pi(F_0) = [] pi(G_0) = [] pi(G_1) = [] The following rules are removed: p1 -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: F_2#(F_2(f,x),x) -> app#(f,x) and R consists of: r1: app(F_0(),y) -> F_1(y) r2: app(F_1(x1),y) -> F_2(x1,y) r3: app(G_0(),y) -> G_1(y) r4: F_2(F_2(f,x),x) -> F_2(G_1(F_2(f,x)),app(f,x)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: (no SCCs)