We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)
, g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))
, h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)
, g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))
, h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(h) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
g(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [1]
h(x1) = [0 3] x1 + [2]
[0 0] [2]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 0] [1]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)
, g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))}
Weak Trs: {h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(h) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
g(x1) = [1 1] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [1]
h(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [0]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)}
Weak Trs:
{ g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))
, h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(h) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
g(x1) = [1 1] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [2]
h(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [2]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Weak Trs:
{ g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)
, g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))
, h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Weak Trs:
{ g(h(g(x))) -> g(x)
, g(g(x)) -> g(h(g(x)))
, h(h(x)) -> h(f(h(x), x))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1))
Proof:
Empty rules are trivially bounded
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))