*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))]  ***
    Considered Problem:
      Strict DP Rules:
        
      Strict TRS Rules:
        minus(x,0()) -> x
        minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
        plus(0(),y) -> y
        plus(minus(x,s(0())),minus(y,s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y,s(s(z))),minus(x,s(0())))
        plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
        quot(0(),s(y)) -> 0()
        quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
      Weak DP Rules:
        
      Weak TRS Rules:
        
      Signature:
        {minus/2,plus/2,quot/2} / {0/0,s/1}
      Obligation:
        Innermost
        basic terms: {minus,plus,quot}/{0,s}
    Applied Processor:
      WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny}
    Proof:
      The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation:
        We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
        The following argument positions are considered usable:
          uargs(quot) = {1},
          uargs(s) = {1}
        
        Following symbols are considered usable:
          {}
        TcT has computed the following interpretation:
              p(0) = [4]                  
          p(minus) = [1] x1 + [2]         
           p(plus) = [6] x1 + [6] x2 + [0]
           p(quot) = [1] x1 + [4] x2 + [4]
              p(s) = [1] x1 + [4]         
        
        Following rules are strictly oriented:
            minus(x,0()) = [1] x + [2]         
                         > [1] x + [0]         
                         = x                   
        
        minus(s(x),s(y)) = [1] x + [6]         
                         > [1] x + [2]         
                         = minus(x,y)          
        
             plus(0(),y) = [6] y + [24]        
                         > [1] y + [0]         
                         = y                   
        
            plus(s(x),y) = [6] x + [6] y + [24]
                         > [6] x + [6] y + [4] 
                         = s(plus(x,y))        
        
          quot(0(),s(y)) = [4] y + [24]        
                         > [4]                 
                         = 0()                 
        
        
        Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
          plus(minus(x,s(0())) =  [6] x + [6] y + [24]    
            ,minus(y,s(s(z))))                            
                               >= [6] x + [6] y + [24]    
                               =  plus(minus(y,s(s(z)))   
                                      ,minus(x,s(0())))   
        
               quot(s(x),s(y)) =  [1] x + [4] y + [24]    
                               >= [1] x + [4] y + [26]    
                               =  s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
        
      Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
*** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))]  ***
    Considered Problem:
      Strict DP Rules:
        
      Strict TRS Rules:
        plus(minus(x,s(0())),minus(y,s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y,s(s(z))),minus(x,s(0())))
        quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
      Weak DP Rules:
        
      Weak TRS Rules:
        minus(x,0()) -> x
        minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
        plus(0(),y) -> y
        plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
        quot(0(),s(y)) -> 0()
      Signature:
        {minus/2,plus/2,quot/2} / {0/0,s/1}
      Obligation:
        Innermost
        basic terms: {minus,plus,quot}/{0,s}
    Applied Processor:
      NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules, greedy = NoGreedy}
    Proof:
      We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
      The following argument positions are considered usable:
        uargs(quot) = {1},
        uargs(s) = {1}
      
      Following symbols are considered usable:
        {minus,plus,quot}
      TcT has computed the following interpretation:
            p(0) = [3]                  
        p(minus) = [1] x1 + [0]         
         p(plus) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [0]
         p(quot) = [2] x1 + [2]         
            p(s) = [1] x1 + [8]         
      
      Following rules are strictly oriented:
      quot(s(x),s(y)) = [2] x + [18]            
                      > [2] x + [10]            
                      = s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
      
      
      Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
                minus(x,0()) =  [1] x + [0]          
                             >= [1] x + [0]          
                             =  x                    
      
            minus(s(x),s(y)) =  [1] x + [8]          
                             >= [1] x + [0]          
                             =  minus(x,y)           
      
                 plus(0(),y) =  [1] y + [3]          
                             >= [1] y + [0]          
                             =  y                    
      
        plus(minus(x,s(0())) =  [1] x + [1] y + [0]  
          ,minus(y,s(s(z))))                         
                             >= [1] x + [1] y + [0]  
                             =  plus(minus(y,s(s(z)))
                                    ,minus(x,s(0())))
      
                plus(s(x),y) =  [1] x + [1] y + [8]  
                             >= [1] x + [1] y + [8]  
                             =  s(plus(x,y))         
      
              quot(0(),s(y)) =  [8]                  
                             >= [3]                  
                             =  0()                  
      
*** 1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))]  ***
    Considered Problem:
      Strict DP Rules:
        
      Strict TRS Rules:
        plus(minus(x,s(0())),minus(y,s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y,s(s(z))),minus(x,s(0())))
      Weak DP Rules:
        
      Weak TRS Rules:
        minus(x,0()) -> x
        minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
        plus(0(),y) -> y
        plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
        quot(0(),s(y)) -> 0()
        quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
      Signature:
        {minus/2,plus/2,quot/2} / {0/0,s/1}
      Obligation:
        Innermost
        basic terms: {minus,plus,quot}/{0,s}
    Applied Processor:
      NaturalMI {miDimension = 3, miDegree = 3, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules, greedy = NoGreedy}
    Proof:
      We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
      The following argument positions are considered usable:
        uargs(quot) = {1},
        uargs(s) = {1}
      
      Following symbols are considered usable:
        {minus,plus,quot}
      TcT has computed the following interpretation:
            p(0) = [0]                          
                   [1]                          
                   [0]                          
        p(minus) = [1 0 0]      [0 0 0]      [0]
                   [1 1 1] x1 + [0 0 0] x2 + [0]
                   [0 1 1]      [1 0 0]      [1]
         p(plus) = [0 1 0]      [1 0 1]      [0]
                   [0 1 0] x1 + [0 1 0] x2 + [1]
                   [0 1 0]      [1 0 1]      [0]
         p(quot) = [1 0 0]      [0]             
                   [1 0 0] x1 + [1]             
                   [0 0 0]      [0]             
            p(s) = [1 0 0]      [1]             
                   [0 1 0] x1 + [1]             
                   [0 0 1]      [0]             
      
      Following rules are strictly oriented:
        plus(minus(x,s(0())) = [1 1 1]     [1 1 1]     [1 0
          ,minus(y,s(s(z))))   0]     [3]                  
                               [1 1 1] x + [1 1 1] y + [0 0
                               0] z + [1]                  
                               [1 1 1]     [1 1 1]     [1 0
                               0]     [3]                  
                             > [1 1 1]     [1 1 1]     [2] 
                               [1 1 1] x + [1 1 1] y + [1] 
                               [1 1 1]     [1 1 1]     [2] 
                             = plus(minus(y,s(s(z)))       
                                   ,minus(x,s(0())))       
      
      
      Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
          minus(x,0()) =  [1 0 0]     [0]            
                          [1 1 1] x + [0]            
                          [0 1 1]     [1]            
                       >= [1 0 0]     [0]            
                          [0 1 0] x + [0]            
                          [0 0 1]     [0]            
                       =  x                          
      
      minus(s(x),s(y)) =  [1 0 0]     [0 0 0]     [1]
                          [1 1 1] x + [0 0 0] y + [2]
                          [0 1 1]     [1 0 0]     [3]
                       >= [1 0 0]     [0 0 0]     [0]
                          [1 1 1] x + [0 0 0] y + [0]
                          [0 1 1]     [1 0 0]     [1]
                       =  minus(x,y)                 
      
           plus(0(),y) =  [1 0 1]     [1]            
                          [0 1 0] y + [2]            
                          [1 0 1]     [1]            
                       >= [1 0 0]     [0]            
                          [0 1 0] y + [0]            
                          [0 0 1]     [0]            
                       =  y                          
      
          plus(s(x),y) =  [0 1 0]     [1 0 1]     [1]
                          [0 1 0] x + [0 1 0] y + [2]
                          [0 1 0]     [1 0 1]     [1]
                       >= [0 1 0]     [1 0 1]     [1]
                          [0 1 0] x + [0 1 0] y + [2]
                          [0 1 0]     [1 0 1]     [0]
                       =  s(plus(x,y))               
      
        quot(0(),s(y)) =  [0]                        
                          [1]                        
                          [0]                        
                       >= [0]                        
                          [1]                        
                          [0]                        
                       =  0()                        
      
       quot(s(x),s(y)) =  [1 0 0]     [1]            
                          [1 0 0] x + [2]            
                          [0 0 0]     [0]            
                       >= [1 0 0]     [1]            
                          [1 0 0] x + [2]            
                          [0 0 0]     [0]            
                       =  s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))   
      
*** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))]  ***
    Considered Problem:
      Strict DP Rules:
        
      Strict TRS Rules:
        
      Weak DP Rules:
        
      Weak TRS Rules:
        minus(x,0()) -> x
        minus(s(x),s(y)) -> minus(x,y)
        plus(0(),y) -> y
        plus(minus(x,s(0())),minus(y,s(s(z)))) -> plus(minus(y,s(s(z))),minus(x,s(0())))
        plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
        quot(0(),s(y)) -> 0()
        quot(s(x),s(y)) -> s(quot(minus(x,y),s(y)))
      Signature:
        {minus/2,plus/2,quot/2} / {0/0,s/1}
      Obligation:
        Innermost
        basic terms: {minus,plus,quot}/{0,s}
    Applied Processor:
      EmptyProcessor
    Proof:
      The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).