We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { f(0()) -> cons(0(), f(s(0()))) , f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0()))) , p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { f(0()) -> cons(0(), f(s(0()))) , f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0()))) , p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(f) = {1}, Uargs(cons) = {2}, Uargs(s) = {}, Uargs(p) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: f(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] [0 0] [1] 0() = [0] [3] cons(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [0] [0 0] [0 0] [1] s(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 1] [1] p(x1) = [0 2] x1 + [0] [0 0] [3] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: { f(0()) -> cons(0(), f(s(0()))) , f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0())))} Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly: TRS Component: {f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0())))} Interpretation of nonconstant growth: ------------------------------------- The following argument positions are usable: Uargs(f) = {1}, Uargs(cons) = {2}, Uargs(s) = {}, Uargs(p) = {} We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation: Interpretation Functions: f(x1) = [1 3] x1 + [0] [0 0] [1] 0() = [0] [0] cons(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [1] [0 0] [0 0] [1] s(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [3] [0 0] [3] p(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0] [0 0] [0] The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: {f(0()) -> cons(0(), f(s(0())))} Weak Trs: { f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0()))) , p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict Trs: {f(0()) -> cons(0(), f(s(0())))} Weak Trs: { f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0()))) , p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We have computed the following dependency pairs Strict DPs: {f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} Weak DPs: { f^#(s(0())) -> f^#(p(s(0()))) , p^#(s(0())) -> c_3()} We consider the following Problem: Strict DPs: {f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} Strict Trs: {f(0()) -> cons(0(), f(s(0())))} Weak DPs: { f^#(s(0())) -> f^#(p(s(0()))) , p^#(s(0())) -> c_3()} Weak Trs: { f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0()))) , p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We replace strict/weak-rules by the corresponding usable rules: Weak Usable Rules: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} We consider the following Problem: Strict DPs: {f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} Weak DPs: { f^#(s(0())) -> f^#(p(s(0()))) , p^#(s(0())) -> c_3()} Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Strict DPs: {f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} Weak DPs: { f^#(s(0())) -> f^#(p(s(0()))) , p^#(s(0())) -> c_3()} Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1)) Proof: We use following congruence DG for path analysis ->2:{1,2} [ YES(O(1),O(1)) ] ->1:{3} [ YES(O(1),O(1)) ] Here dependency-pairs are as follows: Strict DPs: {1: f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} WeakDPs DPs: { 2: f^#(s(0())) -> f^#(p(s(0()))) , 3: p^#(s(0())) -> c_3()} * Path 2:{1,2}: YES(O(1),O(1)) ---------------------------- We consider the following Problem: Strict DPs: {f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: We consider the the dependency-graph 1: f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0())) together with the congruence-graph ->1:{1} Noncyclic, trivial, SCC Here dependency-pairs are as follows: Strict DPs: {1: f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} The following rules are either leafs or part of trailing weak paths, and thus they can be removed: {1: f^#(0()) -> f^#(s(0()))} We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: No rule is usable. We consider the following Problem: StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: Empty rules are trivially bounded * Path 1:{3}: YES(O(1),O(1)) -------------------------- We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: We consider the following Problem: Weak Trs: {p(s(0())) -> 0()} StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: No rule is usable. We consider the following Problem: StartTerms: basic terms Strategy: innermost Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1)) Proof: Empty rules are trivially bounded Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))