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(f(f(X))) → mark(c(f(g(f(X)))))
active(c(X)) → mark(d(X))
active(h(X)) → mark(c(d(X)))
active(f(X)) → f(active(X))
active(h(X)) → h(active(X))
f(mark(X)) → mark(f(X))
h(mark(X)) → mark(h(X))
proper(f(X)) → f(proper(X))
proper(c(X)) → c(proper(X))
proper(g(X)) → g(proper(X))
proper(d(X)) → d(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) → h(proper(X))
f(ok(X)) → ok(f(X))
c(ok(X)) → ok(c(X))
g(ok(X)) → ok(g(X))
d(ok(X)) → ok(d(X))
h(ok(X)) → ok(h(X))
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(f(f(X))) → mark(c(f(g(f(X)))))
active(c(X)) → mark(d(X))
active(h(X)) → mark(c(d(X)))
active(f(X)) → f(active(X))
active(h(X)) → h(active(X))
f(mark(X)) → mark(f(X))
h(mark(X)) → mark(h(X))
proper(f(X)) → f(proper(X))
proper(c(X)) → c(proper(X))
proper(g(X)) → g(proper(X))
proper(d(X)) → d(proper(X))
proper(h(X)) → h(proper(X))
f(ok(X)) → ok(f(X))
c(ok(X)) → ok(c(X))
g(ok(X)) → ok(g(X))
d(ok(X)) → ok(d(X))
h(ok(X)) → ok(h(X))
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
f(mark(X)) →⁺ mark(f(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)