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