### (0) Obligation:

The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

norm(nil) → 0
norm(g(x, y)) → s(norm(x))
f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
rem(nil, y) → nil
rem(g(x, y), 0) → g(x, y)
rem(g(x, y), s(z)) → rem(x, z)

Rewrite Strategy: FULL

### (1) RcToIrcProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Converted rc-obligation to irc-obligation.

As the TRS does not nest defined symbols, we have rc = irc.

### (2) Obligation:

The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).

The TRS R consists of the following rules:

norm(nil) → 0
norm(g(x, y)) → s(norm(x))
f(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
rem(nil, y) → nil
rem(g(x, y), 0) → g(x, y)
rem(g(x, y), s(z)) → rem(x, z)

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

### (3) CpxTrsMatchBoundsTAProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

A linear upper bound on the runtime complexity of the TRS R could be shown with a Match-Bound[TAB_LEFTLINEAR,TAB_NONLEFTLINEAR] (for contructor-based start-terms) of 1.

The compatible tree automaton used to show the Match-Boundedness (for constructor-based start-terms) is represented by:
final states : [1, 2, 3]
transitions:
nil0() → 0
00() → 0
g0(0, 0) → 0
s0(0) → 0
norm0(0) → 1
f0(0, 0) → 2
rem0(0, 0) → 3
01() → 1
norm1(0) → 4
s1(4) → 1
nil1() → 5
g1(5, 0) → 2
f1(0, 0) → 6
g1(6, 0) → 2
nil1() → 3
g1(0, 0) → 3
rem1(0, 0) → 3
01() → 4
s1(4) → 4
g1(5, 0) → 6
g1(6, 0) → 6