We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y)) , mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2) , mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X)) , a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y)) , mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2) , mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X)) , a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(a__f) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {1}, Uargs(mark) = {}, Uargs(f) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: a__f(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [1] [1 0] [0 0] [1] g(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [1] mark(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [1] f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0] [0 0] [0 0] [0] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y)) , mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2) , mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))} Weak Trs: {a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(a__f) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {1}, Uargs(mark) = {}, Uargs(f) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: a__f(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0] [1 0] [0 0] [3] g(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] [0 0] [1] mark(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [1] f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0] [0 0] [0 0] [0] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2) , mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))} Weak Trs: { a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y)) , a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2) , mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))} Weak Trs: { a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y)) , a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2)) Proof: The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(a__f) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {1}, Uargs(mark) = {}, Uargs(f) = {} We have the following constructor-based EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(2)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: a__f(x1, x2) = [1 0 0] x1 + [0 0 0] x2 + [0] [0 1 0] [0 0 0] [2] [0 0 0] [0 0 0] [0] g(x1) = [1 2 0] x1 + [2] [0 1 0] [1] [0 0 0] [0] mark(x1) = [1 2 0] x1 + [0] [0 1 0] [0] [0 0 0] [0] f(x1, x2) = [1 0 0] x1 + [0 0 0] x2 + [0] [0 1 0] [0 0 0] [2] [0 0 0] [0 0 0] [0] Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^2))