YES We show the termination of the TRS R: f(a(),x) -> f(g(x),x) h(g(x)) -> h(a()) g(h(x)) -> g(x) h(h(x)) -> x -- SCC decomposition. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(a(),x) -> f#(g(x),x) p2: f#(a(),x) -> g#(x) p3: h#(g(x)) -> h#(a()) p4: g#(h(x)) -> g#(x) and R consists of: r1: f(a(),x) -> f(g(x),x) r2: h(g(x)) -> h(a()) r3: g(h(x)) -> g(x) r4: h(h(x)) -> x The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs: {p1} {p4} -- Reduction pair. Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of p1: f#(a(),x) -> f#(g(x),x) and R consists of: r1: f(a(),x) -> f(g(x),x) r2: h(g(x)) -> h(a()) r3: g(h(x)) -> g(x) r4: h(h(x)) -> x The set of usable rules consists of r3 Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^2 order: standard order interpretations: f#_A(x1,x2) = ((0,1),(0,0)) x1 + (3,2) a_A() = (2,1) g_A(x1) = (1,0) h_A(x1) = (2,1) precedence: f# > h > a = g partial status: pi(f#) = [] pi(a) = [] pi(g) = [] pi(h) = [] 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: g#(h(x)) -> g#(x) and R consists of: r1: f(a(),x) -> f(g(x),x) r2: h(g(x)) -> h(a()) r3: g(h(x)) -> g(x) r4: h(h(x)) -> x The set of usable rules consists of (no rules) Take the reduction pair: weighted path order base order: matrix interpretations: carrier: N^2 order: standard order interpretations: g#_A(x1) = ((1,0),(1,0)) x1 + (2,2) h_A(x1) = ((1,0),(0,0)) x1 + (1,1) precedence: g# = h partial status: pi(g#) = [] pi(h) = [] The next rules are strictly ordered: p1 We remove them from the problem. Then no dependency pair remains.