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))