We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))
, average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))
, average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))
, average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))
, average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component:
{ average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(average) = {}, Uargs(s) = {1}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
average(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [1]
[0 0] [0 0] [1]
s(x1) = [1 2] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [1]
0() = [0]
[0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))
, average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))}
Weak Trs:
{ average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(average) = {}, Uargs(s) = {1}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
average(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 1] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 1] [0]
s(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 1] [1]
0() = [0]
[0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))}
Weak Trs:
{ average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))
, average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(average) = {}, Uargs(s) = {1}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
average(x1, x2) = [0 1] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [0]
[0 1] [0 1] [0]
s(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[0 1] [2]
0() = [0]
[0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Weak Trs:
{ average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))
, average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))
, average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Weak Trs:
{ average(s(x), y) -> average(x, s(y))
, average(x, s(s(s(y)))) -> s(average(s(x), y))
, average(0(), 0()) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(0())) -> 0()
, average(0(), s(s(0()))) -> s(0())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1))
Proof:
Empty rules are trivially bounded
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))