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