(0) Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given
CpxTRS could be proven to be
BOUNDS(1, n^1).
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(f(x, y)) → f(f(a, h(h(y))), x)
Rewrite Strategy: FULL
(1) RcToIrcProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)
Converted rc-obligation to irc-obligation.
As the TRS is a non-duplicating overlay system, we have rc = irc.
(2) Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given
CpxTRS could be proven to be
BOUNDS(1, n^1).
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
h(f(x, y)) → f(f(a, h(h(y))), x)
Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
(3) CpxTrsMatchBoundsTAProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
A linear upper bound on the runtime complexity of the TRS R could be shown with a Match-Bound[TAB_LEFTLINEAR,TAB_NONLEFTLINEAR] (for contructor-based start-terms) of 2.
The compatible tree automaton used to show the Match-Boundedness (for constructor-based start-terms) is represented by:
final states : [1]
transitions:
f0(0, 0) → 0
a0() → 0
h0(0) → 1
a1() → 3
h1(0) → 5
h1(5) → 4
f1(3, 4) → 2
f1(2, 0) → 1
f1(2, 0) → 5
a2() → 7
h2(0) → 9
h2(9) → 8
f2(7, 8) → 6
f2(6, 2) → 4
f1(2, 0) → 9
f2(6, 2) → 8
(4) BOUNDS(1, n^1)