We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { i(0()) -> 0() , +(0(), y) -> y , +(x, 0()) -> x , i(i(x)) -> x , +(i(x), x) -> 0() , +(x, i(x)) -> 0() , i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y)) , +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z) , +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x , +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { i(0()) -> 0() , +(0(), y) -> y , +(x, 0()) -> x , i(i(x)) -> x , +(i(x), x) -> 0() , +(x, i(x)) -> 0() , i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y)) , +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z) , +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x , +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: { i(0()) -> 0() , i(i(x)) -> x , +(i(x), x) -> 0() , +(x, i(x)) -> 0()} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(i) = {}, Uargs(+) = {1, 2} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: i(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] [0 1] [1] 0() = [0] [0] +(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [1] [0 0] [0 0] [1] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { +(0(), y) -> y , +(x, 0()) -> x , i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y)) , +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z) , +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x , +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x} Weak Trs: { i(0()) -> 0() , i(i(x)) -> x , +(i(x), x) -> 0() , +(x, i(x)) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: { +(0(), y) -> y , +(x, 0()) -> x , +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x , +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(i) = {}, Uargs(+) = {1, 2} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: i(x1) = [0 1] x1 + [0] [1 0] [0] 0() = [0] [0] +(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [1] [0 1] [0 1] [1] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y)) , +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)} Weak Trs: { +(0(), y) -> y , +(x, 0()) -> x , +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x , +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x , i(0()) -> 0() , i(i(x)) -> x , +(i(x), x) -> 0() , +(x, i(x)) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y)) , +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)} Weak Trs: { +(0(), y) -> y , +(x, 0()) -> x , +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x , +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x , i(0()) -> 0() , i(i(x)) -> x , +(i(x), x) -> 0() , +(x, i(x)) -> 0()} 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: { i_0(2) -> 1 , 0_0() -> 1 , 0_0() -> 2 , +_0(2, 2) -> 1} Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))