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