We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ i(0()) -> 0()
, +(0(), y) -> y
, +(x, 0()) -> x
, i(i(x)) -> x
, +(i(x), x) -> 0()
, +(x, i(x)) -> 0()
, i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y))
, +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)
, +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x
, +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ i(0()) -> 0()
, +(0(), y) -> y
, +(x, 0()) -> x
, i(i(x)) -> x
, +(i(x), x) -> 0()
, +(x, i(x)) -> 0()
, i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y))
, +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)
, +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x
, +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component:
{ i(0()) -> 0()
, i(i(x)) -> x
, +(i(x), x) -> 0()
, +(x, i(x)) -> 0()}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(i) = {}, Uargs(+) = {1, 2}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
i(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[0 1] [1]
0() = [0]
[0]
+(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [1]
[0 0] [0 0] [1]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ +(0(), y) -> y
, +(x, 0()) -> x
, i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y))
, +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)
, +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x
, +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x}
Weak Trs:
{ i(0()) -> 0()
, i(i(x)) -> x
, +(i(x), x) -> 0()
, +(x, i(x)) -> 0()}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component:
{ +(0(), y) -> y
, +(x, 0()) -> x
, +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x
, +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(i) = {}, Uargs(+) = {1, 2}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
i(x1) = [0 1] x1 + [0]
[1 0] [0]
0() = [0]
[0]
+(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [1]
[0 1] [0 1] [1]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y))
, +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)}
Weak Trs:
{ +(0(), y) -> y
, +(x, 0()) -> x
, +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x
, +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x
, i(0()) -> 0()
, i(i(x)) -> x
, +(i(x), x) -> 0()
, +(x, i(x)) -> 0()}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ i(+(x, y)) -> +(i(x), i(y))
, +(x, +(y, z)) -> +(+(x, y), z)}
Weak Trs:
{ +(0(), y) -> y
, +(x, 0()) -> x
, +(+(x, i(y)), y) -> x
, +(+(x, y), i(y)) -> x
, i(0()) -> 0()
, i(i(x)) -> x
, +(i(x), x) -> 0()
, +(x, i(x)) -> 0()}
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:
{ i_0(2) -> 1
, 0_0() -> 1
, 0_0() -> 2
, +_0(2, 2) -> 1}
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))