We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z))
, plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) ->
plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z))
, plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) ->
plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component:
{plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) ->
plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(plus) = {2}, Uargs(s) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
plus(x1, x2) = [1 1] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 0] [0]
s(x1) = [1 1] x1 + [1]
[0 0] [1]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z))}
Weak Trs:
{plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) ->
plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {plus(s(X), plus(Y, Z)) -> plus(X, plus(s(s(Y)), Z))}
Weak Trs:
{plus(s(X1), plus(X2, plus(X3, X4))) ->
plus(X1, plus(X3, plus(X2, X4)))}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The problem is match-bounded by 0.
The enriched problem is compatible with the following automaton:
{ plus_0(2, 2) -> 1
, s_0(2) -> 2}
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))