YES

We show the termination of the TRS R:

  a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
  a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
  a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
  mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
  mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
  mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
  mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
  mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
  a__f(X) -> f(X)
  a__p(X) -> p(X)

-- SCC decomposition.

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

p1: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__f#(a__p(s(|0|())))
p2: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__p#(s(|0|()))
p3: a__p#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)
p4: mark#(f(X)) -> a__f#(mark(X))
p5: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X)
p6: mark#(p(X)) -> a__p#(mark(X))
p7: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X)
p8: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)
p9: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p1, p2, p3, p4, p5, p6, p7, p8, p9}


-- Reduction pair.

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

p1: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__f#(a__p(s(|0|())))
p2: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__p#(s(|0|()))
p3: a__p#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)
p4: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)
p5: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)
p6: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X)
p7: mark#(p(X)) -> a__p#(mark(X))
p8: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X)
p9: mark#(f(X)) -> a__f#(mark(X))

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      max/plus interpretations on natural numbers:
      
        a__f#_A(x1) = x1 + 8
        s_A(x1) = max{12, x1 + 4}
        |0|_A = 7
        a__p_A(x1) = max{6, x1}
        a__p#_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 2}
        mark#_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 2}
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1, x2 - 15}
        p_A(x1) = max{6, x1}
        mark_A(x1) = max{3, x1}
        f_A(x1) = max{13, x1 + 10}
        a__f_A(x1) = max{13, x1 + 10}
  
    precedence:
    
      a__f# = s = |0| = a__p = a__p# = mark# = cons = p = mark = f = a__f
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(a__f#) = []
      pi(s) = []
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(a__p) = [1]
      pi(a__p#) = []
      pi(mark#) = []
      pi(cons) = []
      pi(p) = [1]
      pi(mark) = [1]
      pi(f) = []
      pi(a__f) = []

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: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__f#(a__p(s(|0|())))
p2: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__p#(s(|0|()))
p3: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)
p4: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)
p5: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X)
p6: mark#(p(X)) -> a__p#(mark(X))
p7: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X)
p8: mark#(f(X)) -> a__f#(mark(X))

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p3, p4, p5, p7}
  {p1}


-- Reduction pair.

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

p1: mark#(f(X)) -> mark#(X)
p2: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X)
p3: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)
p4: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the monotone reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      max/plus interpretations on natural numbers:
      
        mark#_A(x1) = max{3, x1 + 2}
        f_A(x1) = x1 + 1
        p_A(x1) = x1 + 1
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1, x2}
        s_A(x1) = x1 + 1
  
    precedence:
    
      mark# = f = p = cons = s
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(mark#) = [1]
      pi(f) = [1]
      pi(p) = [1]
      pi(cons) = [1, 2]
      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#(p(X)) -> mark#(X)
p2: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)
p3: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(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: mark#(p(X)) -> mark#(X)
p2: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)
p3: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      max/plus interpretations on natural numbers:
      
        mark#_A(x1) = max{4, x1 + 2}
        p_A(x1) = max{3, x1 + 1}
        s_A(x1) = x1 + 2
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1, x2}
  
    precedence:
    
      mark# = p = s = cons
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(mark#) = []
      pi(p) = [1]
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(cons) = [2]

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)
p2: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(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: mark#(s(X)) -> mark#(X)
p2: mark#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      max/plus interpretations on natural numbers:
      
        mark#_A(x1) = max{4, x1 + 3}
        s_A(x1) = x1 + 2
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 1, x2 + 1}
  
    precedence:
    
      mark# = s = cons
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(mark#) = []
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(cons) = [2]

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#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(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#(cons(X1,X2)) -> mark#(X1)

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      max/plus interpretations on natural numbers:
      
        mark#_A(x1) = x1 + 2
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 1, x2 + 1}
  
    precedence:
    
      mark# = cons
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(mark#) = []
      pi(cons) = [2]

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: a__f#(s(|0|())) -> a__f#(a__p(s(|0|())))

and R consists of:

r1: a__f(|0|()) -> cons(|0|(),f(s(|0|())))
r2: a__f(s(|0|())) -> a__f(a__p(s(|0|())))
r3: a__p(s(X)) -> mark(X)
r4: mark(f(X)) -> a__f(mark(X))
r5: mark(p(X)) -> a__p(mark(X))
r6: mark(|0|()) -> |0|()
r7: mark(cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(mark(X1),X2)
r8: mark(s(X)) -> s(mark(X))
r9: a__f(X) -> f(X)
r10: a__p(X) -> p(X)

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10

Take the reduction pair:

  weighted path order
  
    base order:
  
      max/plus interpretations on natural numbers:
      
        a__f#_A(x1) = x1 + 3
        s_A(x1) = max{17, x1 + 15}
        |0|_A = 0
        a__p_A(x1) = max{14, x1 - 4}
        a__f_A(x1) = max{37, x1 + 18}
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 2, x2 + 2}
        f_A(x1) = max{27, x1 + 18}
        mark_A(x1) = x1 + 10
        p_A(x1) = max{11, x1 - 4}
  
    precedence:
    
      mark > s = a__p > a__f# > a__f = cons = f = p > |0|
    
    partial status:
  
      pi(a__f#) = [1]
      pi(s) = [1]
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(a__p) = []
      pi(a__f) = [1]
      pi(cons) = []
      pi(f) = [1]
      pi(mark) = [1]
      pi(p) = []

The next rules are strictly ordered:

  p1

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