YES(?,O(n^1)) We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate YES(?,O(n^1)). Strict Trs: { minus(n__0(), Y) -> 0() , minus(n__s(X), n__s(Y)) -> minus(activate(X), activate(Y)) , 0() -> n__0() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__0()) -> 0() , activate(n__s(X)) -> s(X) , geq(X, n__0()) -> true() , geq(n__0(), n__s(Y)) -> false() , geq(n__s(X), n__s(Y)) -> geq(activate(X), activate(Y)) , div(0(), n__s(Y)) -> 0() , div(s(X), n__s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, activate(Y)), n__s(div(minus(X, activate(Y)), n__s(activate(Y)))), n__0()) , s(X) -> n__s(X) , if(true(), X, Y) -> activate(X) , if(false(), X, Y) -> activate(Y) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: YES(?,O(n^1)) Arguments of following rules are not normal-forms: { div(0(), n__s(Y)) -> 0() , div(s(X), n__s(Y)) -> if(geq(X, activate(Y)), n__s(div(minus(X, activate(Y)), n__s(activate(Y)))), n__0()) } All above mentioned rules can be savely removed. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate YES(?,O(n^1)). Strict Trs: { minus(n__0(), Y) -> 0() , minus(n__s(X), n__s(Y)) -> minus(activate(X), activate(Y)) , 0() -> n__0() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__0()) -> 0() , activate(n__s(X)) -> s(X) , geq(X, n__0()) -> true() , geq(n__0(), n__s(Y)) -> false() , geq(n__s(X), n__s(Y)) -> geq(activate(X), activate(Y)) , s(X) -> n__s(X) , if(true(), X, Y) -> activate(X) , if(false(), X, Y) -> activate(Y) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: YES(?,O(n^1)) The problem is match-bounded by 4. The enriched problem is compatible with the following automaton. { minus_0(2, 2) -> 1 , minus_1(3, 4) -> 1 , minus_2(5, 6) -> 1 , minus_3(7, 8) -> 1 , n__0_0() -> 1 , n__0_0() -> 2 , n__0_0() -> 3 , n__0_0() -> 4 , n__0_0() -> 5 , n__0_0() -> 6 , n__0_0() -> 7 , n__0_0() -> 8 , n__0_1() -> 1 , n__0_2() -> 1 , n__0_2() -> 3 , n__0_2() -> 4 , n__0_2() -> 5 , n__0_2() -> 6 , n__0_2() -> 7 , n__0_2() -> 8 , n__0_3() -> 1 , n__0_4() -> 1 , 0_0() -> 1 , 0_1() -> 1 , 0_1() -> 3 , 0_1() -> 4 , 0_1() -> 5 , 0_1() -> 6 , 0_1() -> 7 , 0_1() -> 8 , 0_2() -> 1 , 0_3() -> 1 , n__s_0(2) -> 1 , n__s_0(2) -> 2 , n__s_0(2) -> 3 , n__s_0(2) -> 4 , n__s_0(2) -> 5 , n__s_0(2) -> 6 , n__s_0(2) -> 7 , n__s_0(2) -> 8 , n__s_1(2) -> 1 , n__s_2(2) -> 1 , n__s_2(2) -> 3 , n__s_2(2) -> 4 , n__s_2(2) -> 5 , n__s_2(2) -> 6 , n__s_2(2) -> 7 , n__s_2(2) -> 8 , activate_0(2) -> 1 , activate_1(2) -> 1 , activate_1(2) -> 3 , activate_1(2) -> 4 , activate_2(2) -> 5 , activate_2(2) -> 6 , activate_3(2) -> 7 , activate_3(2) -> 8 , geq_0(2, 2) -> 1 , geq_1(4, 4) -> 1 , geq_2(6, 6) -> 1 , geq_3(8, 8) -> 1 , true_0() -> 1 , true_0() -> 2 , true_0() -> 3 , true_0() -> 4 , true_0() -> 5 , true_0() -> 6 , true_0() -> 7 , true_0() -> 8 , true_1() -> 1 , true_2() -> 1 , true_3() -> 1 , false_0() -> 1 , false_0() -> 2 , false_0() -> 3 , false_0() -> 4 , false_0() -> 5 , false_0() -> 6 , false_0() -> 7 , false_0() -> 8 , false_1() -> 1 , false_2() -> 1 , false_3() -> 1 , div_0(2, 2) -> 1 , s_0(2) -> 1 , s_1(2) -> 1 , s_1(2) -> 3 , s_1(2) -> 4 , s_1(2) -> 5 , s_1(2) -> 6 , s_1(2) -> 7 , s_1(2) -> 8 , if_0(2, 2, 2) -> 1 , 2 -> 1 , 2 -> 3 , 2 -> 4 , 2 -> 5 , 2 -> 6 , 2 -> 7 , 2 -> 8 } Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))