We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))
, mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2)
, mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))
, a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))
, mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2)
, mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))
, a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(a__f) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {1}, Uargs(mark) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
a__f(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [1]
[1 0] [0 0] [1]
g(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [1]
mark(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [1]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))
, mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2)
, mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))}
Weak Trs: {a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2))
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies, where following rules are oriented strictly:
TRS Component: {a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))}
Interpretation of nonconstant growth:
-------------------------------------
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(a__f) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {1}, Uargs(mark) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}
We have the following EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(1)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
a__f(x1, x2) = [1 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[1 0] [0 0] [3]
g(x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1]
[0 0] [1]
mark(x1) = [0 0] x1 + [0]
[0 0] [1]
f(x1, x2) = [0 0] x1 + [0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 0] [0 0] [0]
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2)
, mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))}
Weak Trs:
{ a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))
, a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2))
Proof:
We consider the following Problem:
Strict Trs:
{ mark(f(X1, X2)) -> a__f(mark(X1), X2)
, mark(g(X)) -> g(mark(X))}
Weak Trs:
{ a__f(g(X), Y) -> a__f(mark(X), f(g(X), Y))
, a__f(X1, X2) -> f(X1, X2)}
StartTerms: basic terms
Strategy: innermost
Certificate: YES(?,O(n^2))
Proof:
The following argument positions are usable:
Uargs(a__f) = {1}, Uargs(g) = {1}, Uargs(mark) = {}, Uargs(f) = {}
We have the following constructor-based EDA-non-satisfying and IDA(2)-non-satisfying matrix interpretation:
Interpretation Functions:
a__f(x1, x2) = [1 0 0] x1 + [0 0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 1 0] [0 0 0] [2]
[0 0 0] [0 0 0] [0]
g(x1) = [1 2 0] x1 + [2]
[0 1 0] [1]
[0 0 0] [0]
mark(x1) = [1 2 0] x1 + [0]
[0 1 0] [0]
[0 0 0] [0]
f(x1, x2) = [1 0 0] x1 + [0 0 0] x2 + [0]
[0 1 0] [0 0 0] [2]
[0 0 0] [0 0 0] [0]
Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^2))