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

(0) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(h(X)) → mark(g(X, X))
active(g(a, X)) → mark(f(b, X))
active(f(X, X)) → mark(h(a))
active(a) → mark(b)
active(h(X)) → h(active(X))
active(g(X1, X2)) → g(active(X1), X2)
active(f(X1, X2)) → f(active(X1), X2)
h(mark(X)) → mark(h(X))
g(mark(X1), X2) → mark(g(X1, X2))
f(mark(X1), X2) → mark(f(X1, X2))
proper(h(X)) → h(proper(X))
proper(g(X1, X2)) → g(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(f(X1, X2)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(b) → ok(b)
h(ok(X)) → ok(h(X))
g(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(g(X1, X2))
f(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(f(X1, X2))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

Rewrite Strategy: FULL

(1) CpxTrsToCpxRelTrsProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Transformed TRS to relative TRS where S is empty.

(2) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity Relative TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

active(h(X)) → mark(g(X, X))
active(g(a, X)) → mark(f(b, X))
active(f(X, X)) → mark(h(a))
active(a) → mark(b)
active(h(X)) → h(active(X))
active(g(X1, X2)) → g(active(X1), X2)
active(f(X1, X2)) → f(active(X1), X2)
h(mark(X)) → mark(h(X))
g(mark(X1), X2) → mark(g(X1, X2))
f(mark(X1), X2) → mark(f(X1, X2))
proper(h(X)) → h(proper(X))
proper(g(X1, X2)) → g(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(a) → ok(a)
proper(f(X1, X2)) → f(proper(X1), proper(X2))
proper(b) → ok(b)
h(ok(X)) → ok(h(X))
g(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(g(X1, X2))
f(ok(X1), ok(X2)) → ok(f(X1, X2))
top(mark(X)) → top(proper(X))
top(ok(X)) → top(active(X))

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL

(3) DecreasingLoopProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Ω(n¹):
The rewrite sequence
h(mark(X)) →⁺ mark(h(X))
gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
The pumping substitution is [X / mark(X)].
The result substitution is [ ].

(4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)