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))