YES We show the termination of the TRS R: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) f(mark(X)) -> f(X) f(active(X)) -> f(X) cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) s(mark(X)) -> s(X) s(active(X)) -> s(X) p(mark(X)) -> p(X) p(active(X)) -> p(X) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: active#(f(|0|())) -> mark#(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) p2: active#(f(|0|())) -> cons#(|0|(),f(s(|0|()))) p3: active#(f(|0|())) -> f#(s(|0|())) p4: active#(f(|0|())) -> s#(|0|()) p5: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p6: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> f#(p(s(|0|()))) p7: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> p#(s(|0|())) p8: active#(p(s(X))) -> mark#(X) p9: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p10: mark#(f(X)) -> f#(mark(X)) p11: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p12: mark#(|0|()) -> active#(|0|()) p13: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> active#(cons(mark(X1),X2)) p14: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons#(mark(X1),X2) p15: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1) p16: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p17: mark#(s(X)) -> s#(mark(X)) p18: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p19: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p20: mark#(p(X)) -> p#(mark(X)) p21: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) p22: f#(mark(X)) -> f#(X) p23: f#(active(X)) -> f#(X) p24: cons#(mark(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) p25: cons#(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p26: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) p27: cons#(X1,active(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p28: s#(mark(X)) -> s#(X) p29: s#(active(X)) -> s#(X) p30: p#(mark(X)) -> p#(X) p31: p#(active(X)) -> p#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p5, p8, p9, p11, p13, p15, p16, p18, p19, p21} {p22, p23} {p24, p25, p26, p27} {p28, p29} {p30, p31} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: active#(f(|0|())) -> mark#(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) p2: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1) p3: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) p4: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p5: active#(p(s(X))) -> mark#(X) p6: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p7: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p8: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p9: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p10: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> active#(cons(mark(X1),X2)) p11: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18 Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: active#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = 2 |0|_A() = 4 mark#_A(x1) = 2 cons_A(x1,x2) = 1 s_A(x1) = 1 p_A(x1) = 2 mark_A(x1) = 3 active_A(x1) = 3 precedence: active# = mark# = cons = s > f > |0| = p = mark = active partial status: pi(active#) = [] pi(f) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(mark#) = [] pi(cons) = [] pi(s) = [] pi(p) = [] pi(mark) = [] pi(active) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p10 We remove them from the problem. -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: active#(f(|0|())) -> mark#(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) p2: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1) p3: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) p4: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p5: active#(p(s(X))) -> mark#(X) p6: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p7: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p8: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p9: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p10: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2, p3, p4, p5, p6, p7, p8, p9, p10} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: active#(f(|0|())) -> mark#(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) p2: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1) p3: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p4: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p5: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p6: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p7: active#(p(s(X))) -> mark#(X) p8: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p9: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p10: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18 Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: active#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 2 |0|_A() = 1 mark#_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + 2 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 mark_A(x1) = x1 p_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 precedence: |0| = cons = mark = active > f = s > p > active# = mark# partial status: pi(active#) = [] pi(f) = [1] pi(|0|) = [] pi(mark#) = [] pi(cons) = [] pi(s) = [1] pi(mark) = [] pi(p) = [] pi(active) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p2 We remove them from the problem. -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: active#(f(|0|())) -> mark#(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) p2: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p3: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p4: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p5: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p6: active#(p(s(X))) -> mark#(X) p7: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p8: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p9: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p2, p3, p4, p5, p6, p7, p8, p9} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p2: active#(p(s(X))) -> mark#(X) p3: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) p4: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p5: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p6: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p7: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p8: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18 Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: mark#_A(x1) = x1 + 1 f_A(x1) = x1 active#_A(x1) = x1 + 1 mark_A(x1) = x1 p_A(x1) = x1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 2 |0|_A() = 2 active_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = 1 precedence: f = p = |0| > s > mark# = active# = mark = active = cons partial status: pi(mark#) = [1] pi(f) = [] pi(active#) = [1] pi(mark) = [] pi(p) = [] pi(s) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(active) = [] pi(cons) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p2 We remove them from the problem. -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p2: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) p3: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p4: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p5: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p6: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p7: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2, p3, p4, p5, p6, p7} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p2: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p3: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X) p4: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p5: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p6: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p7: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18 Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: mark#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active#_A(x1) = x1 mark_A(x1) = x1 s_A(x1) = x1 |0|_A() = 0 p_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 precedence: f > mark# = active# > mark = s = |0| = p = active > cons partial status: pi(mark#) = [] pi(f) = [] pi(active#) = [] pi(mark) = [] pi(s) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(p) = [] pi(active) = [] pi(cons) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p3 We remove them from the problem. -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p2: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) p3: mark#(s(X)) -> active#(s(mark(X))) p4: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) p5: mark#(p(X)) -> active#(p(mark(X))) p6: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p4, p6} {p1, p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X) p2: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: mark#_A(x1) = x1 p_A(x1) = x1 + 1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: mark# = p = s partial status: pi(mark#) = [1] pi(p) = [1] pi(s) = [1] 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: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: mark#_A(x1) = x1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: mark# = s partial status: pi(mark#) = [1] pi(s) = [1] 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: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) p2: active#(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark#(f(p(s(|0|())))) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, r11, r12, r13, r14, r15, r16, r17, r18 Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: mark#_A(x1) = x1 f_A(x1) = x1 active#_A(x1) = x1 mark_A(x1) = x1 s_A(x1) = x1 + 1 |0|_A() = 2 p_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 cons_A(x1,x2) = 1 precedence: s > mark# = mark = cons > active > |0| > f = active# > p partial status: pi(mark#) = [1] pi(f) = [1] pi(active#) = [1] pi(mark) = [1] pi(s) = [] pi(|0|) = [] pi(p) = [] pi(active) = [1] pi(cons) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p2 We remove them from the problem. -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: mark#(f(X)) -> active#(f(mark(X))) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(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: f#(mark(X)) -> f#(X) p2: f#(active(X)) -> f#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: f#_A(x1) = x1 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: f# = mark = active partial status: pi(f#) = [1] pi(mark) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: f#(active(X)) -> f#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(active(X)) -> f#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: f#_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: f# = active partial status: pi(f#) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: cons#(mark(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) p2: cons#(X1,active(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p3: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) p4: cons#(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) 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: cons#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: cons# = mark = active partial status: pi(cons#) = [] pi(mark) = [1] pi(active) = [] 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: cons#(X1,active(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p2: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) p3: cons#(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2, p3} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: cons#(X1,active(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p2: cons#(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p3: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) 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: cons#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: cons# = active = mark partial status: pi(cons#) = [1] pi(active) = [1] pi(mark) = [1] 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: cons#(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p2: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1, p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: cons#(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons#(X1,X2) p2: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) 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: cons#_A(x1,x2) = x1 + x2 + 2 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: mark = active > cons# partial status: pi(cons#) = [] pi(mark) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: cons#(active(X1),X2) -> cons#(X1,X2) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) 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: cons#_A(x1,x2) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: cons# = active partial status: pi(cons#) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: s#(mark(X)) -> s#(X) p2: s#(active(X)) -> s#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: s#_A(x1) = x1 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: s# = mark = active partial status: pi(s#) = [1] pi(mark) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: s#(active(X)) -> s#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: s#(active(X)) -> s#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: s#_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: s# = active partial status: pi(s#) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: p#(mark(X)) -> p#(X) p2: p#(active(X)) -> p#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: p#_A(x1) = x1 mark_A(x1) = x1 + 1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: p# = mark = active partial status: pi(p#) = [1] pi(mark) = [1] pi(active) = [1] 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: p#(active(X)) -> p#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: p#(active(X)) -> p#(X) and R consists of: r1: active(f(|0|())) -> mark(cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))) r2: active(f(s(|0|()))) -> mark(f(p(s(|0|())))) r3: active(p(s(X))) -> mark(X) r4: mark(f(X)) -> active(f(mark(X))) r5: mark(|0|()) -> active(|0|()) r6: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> active(cons(mark(X1),X2)) r7: mark(s(X)) -> active(s(mark(X))) r8: mark(p(X)) -> active(p(mark(X))) r9: f(mark(X)) -> f(X) r10: f(active(X)) -> f(X) r11: cons(mark(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r12: cons(X1,mark(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r13: cons(active(X1),X2) -> cons(X1,X2) r14: cons(X1,active(X2)) -> cons(X1,X2) r15: s(mark(X)) -> s(X) r16: s(active(X)) -> s(X) r17: p(mark(X)) -> p(X) r18: p(active(X)) -> p(X) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the monotone reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^1 order: lexicographic order interpretations: p#_A(x1) = x1 active_A(x1) = x1 + 1 precedence: p# = active partial status: pi(p#) = [1] pi(active) = [1] The next rules are strictly ordered: p1 We remove them from the problem. Then no dependency pair remains.