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