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))
  quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
  quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
  log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
  log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

-- 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: quot#(s(x),s(y)) -> quot#(minus(x,y),s(y))
p6: quot#(s(x),s(y)) -> minus#(x,y)
p7: log#(s(s(x))) -> log#(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|())))))
p8: log#(s(s(x))) -> quot#(x,s(s(|0|())))

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: quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
r9: quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
r10: log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
r11: log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

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


-- Reduction pair.

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

p1: log#(s(s(x))) -> log#(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|())))))

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: quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
r9: quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
r10: log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
r11: log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      matrix interpretations:
      
        carrier: N^1
        order: lexicographic order
        interpretations:
          log#_A(x1) = x1 + 1
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 4
          quot_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 1
          |0|_A() = 2
          le_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 5
          true_A() = 3
          false_A() = 3
          if_minus_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2
          minus_A(x1,x2) = x1
  
    precedence:
    
      le = true > false = if_minus = minus > s = quot > log# = |0|
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(log#) = [1]
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(quot) = [1]
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(le) = []
      pi(true) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(if_minus) = []
      pi(minus) = []

The next rules are strictly ordered:

  p1

We remove them from the problem.  Then no dependency pair remains.

-- Reduction pair.

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

p1: quot#(s(x),s(y)) -> quot#(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(|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: quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
r9: quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
r10: log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
r11: log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      matrix interpretations:
      
        carrier: N^1
        order: lexicographic order
        interpretations:
          quot#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 1
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 4
          minus_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 2
          le_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 1
          |0|_A() = 6
          true_A() = 6
          false_A() = 3
          if_minus_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 2
  
    precedence:
    
      s = minus = |0| = true = if_minus > false > quot# = le
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(quot#) = []
      pi(s) = []
      pi(minus) = []
      pi(le) = [1, 2]
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(true) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(if_minus) = []

The next rules are strictly ordered:

  p1

We remove them from the problem.  Then no dependency pair remains.

-- 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: quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
r9: quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
r10: log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
r11: log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      matrix interpretations:
      
        carrier: N^1
        order: lexicographic order
        interpretations:
          if_minus#_A(x1,x2,x3) = x2 + 1
          false_A() = 7
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 6
          minus#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 5
          le_A(x1,x2) = x2 + 5
          |0|_A() = 3
          true_A() = 4
  
    precedence:
    
      if_minus# = false = minus# = le = |0| = true > s
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(if_minus#) = []
      pi(false) = []
      pi(s) = []
      pi(minus#) = [1]
      pi(le) = [2]
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(true) = []

The next rules are strictly ordered:

  p1

We remove them from the problem.

-- 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: quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
r9: quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
r10: log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
r11: log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

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: quot(|0|(),s(y)) -> |0|()
r9: quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
r10: log(s(|0|())) -> |0|()
r11: log(s(s(x))) -> s(log(s(quot(x,s(s(|0|()))))))

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      matrix interpretations:
      
        carrier: N^1
        order: lexicographic order
        interpretations:
          le#_A(x1,x2) = x2
          s_A(x1) = x1 + 1
  
    precedence:
    
      le# = s
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(le#) = [2]
      pi(s) = [1]

The next rules are strictly ordered:

  p1

We remove them from the problem.  Then no dependency pair remains.