We consider the system AotoYamada_05__004. Alphabet: 0 : [] --> b cons : [a * b] --> b nil : [] --> b plus : [b * b] --> b s : [b] --> b sumwith : [a -> b * b] --> b Rules: plus(0, x) => x plus(s(x), y) => s(plus(x, y)) sumwith(f, nil) => nil sumwith(f, cons(x, y)) => plus(f x, sumwith(f, y)) This AFS is converted to an AFSM simply by replacing all free variables by meta-variables (with arity 0). We use the dependency pair framework as described in [Kop12, Ch. 6/7], with static dependency pairs (see [KusIsoSakBla09] and the adaptation for AFSMs and accessible arguments in [Kop13]). We thus obtain the following dependency pair problem (P_0, R_0, static, formative): Dependency Pairs P_0: 0] plus#(s(X), Y) =#> plus#(X, Y) 1] sumwith#(F, cons(X, Y)) =#> plus#(F X, sumwith(F, Y)) 2] sumwith#(F, cons(X, Y)) =#> sumwith#(F, Y) Rules R_0: plus(0, X) => X plus(s(X), Y) => s(plus(X, Y)) sumwith(F, nil) => nil sumwith(F, cons(X, Y)) => plus(F X, sumwith(F, Y)) Thus, the original system is terminating if (P_0, R_0, static, formative) is finite. We consider the dependency pair problem (P_0, R_0, static, formative). We place the elements of P in a dependency graph approximation G (see e.g. [Kop12, Thm. 7.27, 7.29], as follows: * 0 : 0 * 1 : 0 * 2 : 1, 2 This graph has the following strongly connected components: P_1: plus#(s(X), Y) =#> plus#(X, Y) P_2: sumwith#(F, cons(X, Y)) =#> sumwith#(F, Y) By [Kop12, Thm. 7.31], we may replace any dependency pair problem (P_0, R_0, m, f) by (P_1, R_0, m, f) and (P_2, R_0, m, f). Thus, the original system is terminating if each of (P_1, R_0, static, formative) and (P_2, R_0, static, formative) is finite. We consider the dependency pair problem (P_2, R_0, static, formative). We apply the subterm criterion with the following projection function: nu(sumwith#) = 2 Thus, we can orient the dependency pairs as follows: nu(sumwith#(F, cons(X, Y))) = cons(X, Y) |> Y = nu(sumwith#(F, Y)) By [Kop12, Thm. 7.35] and [Kop13, Thm. 5], we may replace a dependency pair problem (P_2, R_0, static, f) by ({}, R_0, static, f). By the empty set processor [Kop12, Thm. 7.15] this problem may be immediately removed. Thus, the original system is terminating if (P_1, R_0, static, formative) is finite. We consider the dependency pair problem (P_1, R_0, static, formative). We apply the subterm criterion with the following projection function: nu(plus#) = 1 Thus, we can orient the dependency pairs as follows: nu(plus#(s(X), Y)) = s(X) |> X = nu(plus#(X, Y)) By [Kop12, Thm. 7.35] and [Kop13, Thm. 5], we may replace a dependency pair problem (P_1, R_0, static, f) by ({}, R_0, static, f). By the empty set processor [Kop12, Thm. 7.15] this problem may be immediately removed. As all dependency pair problems were succesfully simplified with sound (and complete) processors until nothing remained, we conclude termination. +++ Citations +++ [Kop12] C. Kop. Higher Order Termination. PhD Thesis, 2012. [Kop13] C. Kop. Static Dependency Pairs with Accessibility. Unpublished manuscript, http://cl-informatik.uibk.ac.at/users/kop/static.pdf, 2013. [KusIsoSakBla09] K. Kusakari, Y. Isogai, M. Sakai, and F. Blanqui. Static Dependency Pair Method Based On Strong Computability for Higher-Order Rewrite Systems. In volume 92(10) of IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems. 2007--2015, 2009.