YES We show the termination of the TRS R: app(app(append(),nil()),ys) -> ys app(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app(app(cons(),x),app(app(append(),xs),ys)) app(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app(app(cons(),app(f,x)),nil()) app(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) app(app(flatwithsub(),f),nil()) -> nil() app(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(append(),app(app(flatwith(),f),x)),app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs)) -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app#(app(cons(),x),app(app(append(),xs),ys)) p2: app#(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app#(app(append(),xs),ys) p3: app#(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app#(append(),xs) p4: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app#(app(cons(),app(f,x)),nil()) p5: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app#(cons(),app(f,x)) p6: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app#(f,x) p7: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) p8: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app#(flatwithsub(),f) p9: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(app(append(),app(app(flatwith(),f),x)),app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs)) p10: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(append(),app(app(flatwith(),f),x)) p11: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(app(flatwith(),f),x) p12: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(flatwith(),f) p13: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) and R consists of: r1: app(app(append(),nil()),ys) -> ys r2: app(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app(app(cons(),x),app(app(append(),xs),ys)) r3: app(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app(app(cons(),app(f,x)),nil()) r4: app(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) r5: app(app(flatwithsub(),f),nil()) -> nil() r6: app(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(append(),app(app(flatwith(),f),x)),app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs)) The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p6, p7, p11, p13} {p2} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) p2: app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app#(app(flatwith(),f),x) p3: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app#(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) p4: app#(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app#(f,x) and R consists of: r1: app(app(append(),nil()),ys) -> ys r2: app(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app(app(cons(),x),app(app(append(),xs),ys)) r3: app(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app(app(cons(),app(f,x)),nil()) r4: app(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) r5: app(app(flatwithsub(),f),nil()) -> nil() r6: app(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(append(),app(app(flatwith(),f),x)),app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: lexicographic combination of reduction pairs: 1. weighted path order base order: max/plus interpretations on natural numbers: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{5, x1 - 1, x2} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1, x2 + 5} flatwithsub_A = 1 cons_A = 5 flatwith_A = 3 node_A = 5 leaf_A = 0 precedence: app# = app = flatwithsub = cons = flatwith = node = leaf partial status: pi(app#) = [2] pi(app) = [1, 2] pi(flatwithsub) = [] pi(cons) = [] pi(flatwith) = [] pi(node) = [] pi(leaf) = [] 2. weighted path order base order: max/plus interpretations on natural numbers: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x2 - 5} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 9, x2 + 16} flatwithsub_A = 6 cons_A = 5 flatwith_A = 13 node_A = 7 leaf_A = 0 precedence: app# = app = flatwithsub = cons = flatwith = node = leaf partial status: pi(app#) = [] pi(app) = [2] pi(flatwithsub) = [] pi(cons) = [] pi(flatwith) = [] pi(node) = [] pi(leaf) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p1, p2, p3, p4 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: app#(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app#(app(append(),xs),ys) and R consists of: r1: app(app(append(),nil()),ys) -> ys r2: app(app(append(),app(app(cons(),x),xs)),ys) -> app(app(cons(),x),app(app(append(),xs),ys)) r3: app(app(flatwith(),f),app(leaf(),x)) -> app(app(cons(),app(f,x)),nil()) r4: app(app(flatwith(),f),app(node(),xs)) -> app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs) r5: app(app(flatwithsub(),f),nil()) -> nil() r6: app(app(flatwithsub(),f),app(app(cons(),x),xs)) -> app(app(append(),app(app(flatwith(),f),x)),app(app(flatwithsub(),f),xs)) The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: lexicographic combination of reduction pairs: 1. weighted path order base order: max/plus interpretations on natural numbers: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 4, x2 + 5} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 2, x2 + 4} append_A = 2 cons_A = 3 precedence: app = append > app# = cons partial status: pi(app#) = [1, 2] pi(app) = [1, 2] pi(append) = [] pi(cons) = [] 2. weighted path order base order: max/plus interpretations on natural numbers: app#_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 15, x2 + 3} app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 4, x2 + 7} append_A = 2 cons_A = 3 precedence: app# = app = append = cons partial status: pi(app#) = [] pi(app) = [1, 2] pi(append) = [] pi(cons) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p1 We remove them from the problem. Then no dependency pair remains.