YES We show the termination of the relative TRS R/S: R: f(s(x),y,y) -> f(y,x,s(x)) S: rand(x) -> x rand(x) -> rand(s(x)) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the non-minimal dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(s(x),y,y) -> f#(y,x,s(x)) and R consists of: r1: f(s(x),y,y) -> f(y,x,s(x)) r2: rand(x) -> x r3: rand(x) -> rand(s(x)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the non-minimal dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(s(x),y,y) -> f#(y,x,s(x)) and R consists of: r1: f(s(x),y,y) -> f(y,x,s(x)) r2: rand(x) -> x r3: rand(x) -> rand(s(x)) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3 Take the reduction pair: lexicographic combination of reduction pairs: 1. weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^2 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1,x2,x3) = ((1,0),(1,1)) x1 + ((1,0),(0,0)) x2 + ((0,0),(1,1)) x3 + (1,1) s_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1,x2,x3) = ((1,0),(1,1)) x1 + ((1,0),(1,1)) x3 + (1,1) rand_A(x1) = ((1,0),(1,1)) x1 + (1,1) precedence: f# = s = f = rand partial status: pi(f#) = [] pi(s) = [] pi(f) = [] pi(rand) = [] 2. weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^2 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1,x2,x3) = ((0,1),(0,0)) x1 + ((0,1),(0,0)) x2 + (2,1) s_A(x1) = ((0,0),(1,1)) x1 + (1,2) f_A(x1,x2,x3) = ((0,0),(0,1)) x1 + ((0,0),(0,1)) x3 + (2,1) rand_A(x1) = (0,0) precedence: s = f > f# > rand partial status: pi(f#) = [] pi(s) = [] pi(f) = [] pi(rand) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p1 We remove them from the problem. Then no dependency pair remains.