We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ h(X) -> g(X, X)
, g(a(), X) -> f(b(), activate(X))
, f(X, X) -> h(a())
, a() -> b()
, activate(X) -> X}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
Arguments of following rules are not normal-forms:
{g(a(), X) -> f(b(), activate(X))}
All above mentioned rules can be savely removed.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ h(X) -> g(X, X)
, f(X, X) -> h(a())
, a() -> b()
, activate(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: {f(X, X) -> h(a())}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(h) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
h(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[0 0] [1]
g(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [1 0] [0]
a() = [0]
[0]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [2]
[0 0] [0 0] [2]
b() = [0]
[0]
activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ h(X) -> g(X, X)
, a() -> b()
, activate(X) -> X}
Weak Trs: {f(X, X) -> h(a())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {a() -> b()}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(h) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
h(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[0 0] [1]
g(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [1 0] [0]
a() = [2]
[0]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [3]
[0 0] [0 0] [2]
b() = [0]
[0]
activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ h(X) -> g(X, X)
, activate(X) -> X}
Weak Trs:
{ a() -> b()
, f(X, X) -> h(a())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {h(X) -> g(X, X)}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(h) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
h(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[1 0] [1]
g(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[1 0] [0 0] [0]
a() = [0]
[0]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [2]
[0 0] [0 0] [2]
b() = [0]
[0]
activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs: {activate(X) -> X}
Weak Trs:
{ h(X) -> g(X, X)
, a() -> b()
, f(X, X) -> h(a())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^1))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {activate(X) -> X}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(h) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}, Uargs(activate) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
h(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[0 1] [1]
g(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 1] [0]
a() = [0]
[0]
f(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [2]
[0 1] [0 0] [2]
b() = [0]
[0]
activate(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [2]
[0 1] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Weak Trs:
{ activate(X) -> X
, h(X) -> g(X, X)
, a() -> b()
, f(X, X) -> h(a())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Weak Trs:
{ activate(X) -> X
, h(X) -> g(X, X)
, a() -> b()
, f(X, X) -> h(a())}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(O(1),O(1))
Proof:
Empty rules are trivially bounded
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))