We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { f(f(a())) -> c(n__f(g(f(a())))) , f(X) -> n__f(X) , activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X) , activate(X) -> X} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: Arguments of following rules are not normal-forms: {f(f(a())) -> c(n__f(g(f(a()))))} All above mentioned rules can be savely removed. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { f(X) -> n__f(X) , activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X) , activate(X) -> X} 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) -> n__f(X)} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(c) = {}, Uargs(n__f) = {}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: f(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [2] [0 0] [0] a() = [0] [0] c(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] n__f(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] g(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] [0 0] [1] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X) , activate(X) -> X} Weak Trs: {f(X) -> n__f(X)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X)} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(c) = {}, Uargs(n__f) = {}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: f(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] a() = [0] [0] c(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] n__f(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] g(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] [0 0] [1] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: {activate(X) -> X} Weak Trs: { activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X) , f(X) -> n__f(X)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {activate(X) -> X} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(c) = {}, Uargs(n__f) = {}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: f(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] a() = [0] [0] c(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0] [0 1] [0] n__f(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] g(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0] [0 1] [0] activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] [0 1] [1] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: { activate(X) -> X , activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X) , f(X) -> n__f(X)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: { activate(X) -> X , activate(n__f(X)) -> f(X) , f(X) -> n__f(X)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: Empty rules are trivially bounded Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))