We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ a(f(), a(f(), x)) -> a(x, g())
, a(x, g()) -> a(f(), a(g(), a(f(), x)))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ a(f(), a(f(), x)) -> a(x, g())
, a(x, g()) -> a(f(), a(g(), a(f(), x)))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {a(f(), a(f(), x)) -> a(x, g())}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(a) = {2}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
a(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [2]
[0 0] [0 1] [1]
f() = [0]
[0]
g() = [0]
[0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {a(x, g()) -> a(f(), a(g(), a(f(), x)))}
Weak Trs: {a(f(), a(f(), x)) -> a(x, g())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {a(x, g()) -> a(f(), a(g(), a(f(), x)))}
Weak Trs: {a(f(), a(f(), x)) -> a(x, g())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The problem is match-bounded by 1.
The enriched problem is compatible with the following automaton:
{ a_0(2, 2) -> 1
, a_1(3, 4) -> 1
, a_1(5, 6) -> 4
, a_1(5, 8) -> 2
, a_1(7, 2) -> 6
, a_1(7, 7) -> 8
, f_0() -> 2
, f_1() -> 3
, f_1() -> 7
, g_0() -> 2
, g_1() -> 5}
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))