We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z)) , plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) -> plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z)) , plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) -> plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) -> plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(plus) = {2}, Uargs(s) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: plus(x1, x2) = [1 1] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [0] [0 0] [0 0] [0] s(x1) = [1 1] x1 + [1] [0 0] [1] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: {plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z))} Weak Trs: {plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) -> plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: {plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z))} Weak Trs: {plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) -> plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The problem is match-bounded by 0. The enriched problem is compatible with the following automaton: { plus_0(2, 2) -> 1 , s_0(2) -> 2} Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))