YES
Did not drop rules.
Inlined conditions for 3 rules:
  div(s(x)
     ,s(y)) -> s(div(minus(x,y)
                    ,s(y)))  | lte(s(x)
                                  ,y) ->* false()
  power(x,n) -> mult(mult(power(x
                               ,div(n,s(s(0()))))
                         ,power(x,div(n,s(s(0())))))
                    ,s(0()))  | mod(n
                                   ,s(s(0()))) ->* 0()
  power(x,n) -> mult(mult(power(x
                               ,div(n,s(s(0()))))
                         ,power(x,div(n,s(s(0())))))
                    ,x)  | mod(n,s(s(0()))) ->* s(z)
Left-inlined conditions for 0 rules.
Due to Ifrit-method removed 0 infeasible rules.
Did not use redundant rules method.
INFEASIBLE because

problem lte(s(x2)
           ,0()) ->* true()
obtained from
root-nonreachability
requires
  [problem obtained from
  narrowing is proven infeasible
  using the symbol transition graph on
  false() ->* true()
  ,problem obtained from narrowing
  is proven infeasible
  since unification failed for
  lte(s(x2),0()) ~ true()]

where | is used as a fresh function symbol, since it is illegal in the input format.