*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] ***
Considered Problem:
Strict DP Rules:
Strict TRS Rules:
f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(0(),1(),z))
f(0(),1(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x)
g(x,y) -> x
g(x,y) -> y
Weak DP Rules:
Weak TRS Rules:
Signature:
{f/3,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1}
Obligation:
Full
basic terms: {f,g}/{0,1,s}
Applied Processor:
WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny}
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation:
We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
The following argument positions are considered usable:
uargs(s) = {1}
Following symbols are considered usable:
{}
TcT has computed the following interpretation:
p(0) = [0]
p(1) = [0]
p(f) = [0]
p(g) = [2] x1 + [2] x2 + [1]
p(s) = [1] x1 + [0]
Following rules are strictly oriented:
g(x,y) = [2] x + [2] y + [1]
> [1] x + [0]
= x
g(x,y) = [2] x + [2] y + [1]
> [1] y + [0]
= y
Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
f(x,y,s(z)) = [0]
>= [0]
= s(f(0(),1(),z))
f(0(),1(),x) = [0]
>= [0]
= f(s(x),x,x)
Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
*** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] ***
Considered Problem:
Strict DP Rules:
Strict TRS Rules:
f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(0(),1(),z))
f(0(),1(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x)
Weak DP Rules:
Weak TRS Rules:
g(x,y) -> x
g(x,y) -> y
Signature:
{f/3,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1}
Obligation:
Full
basic terms: {f,g}/{0,1,s}
Applied Processor:
WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny}
Proof:
The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation:
We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
The following argument positions are considered usable:
uargs(s) = {1}
Following symbols are considered usable:
{}
TcT has computed the following interpretation:
p(0) = [1]
p(1) = [1]
p(f) = [8] x3 + [0]
p(g) = [1] x1 + [2] x2 + [8]
p(s) = [1] x1 + [2]
Following rules are strictly oriented:
f(x,y,s(z)) = [8] z + [16]
> [8] z + [2]
= s(f(0(),1(),z))
Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
f(0(),1(),x) = [8] x + [0]
>= [8] x + [0]
= f(s(x),x,x)
g(x,y) = [1] x + [2] y + [8]
>= [1] x + [0]
= x
g(x,y) = [1] x + [2] y + [8]
>= [1] y + [0]
= y
Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
*** 1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] ***
Considered Problem:
Strict DP Rules:
Strict TRS Rules:
f(0(),1(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x)
Weak DP Rules:
Weak TRS Rules:
f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(0(),1(),z))
g(x,y) -> x
g(x,y) -> y
Signature:
{f/3,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1}
Obligation:
Full
basic terms: {f,g}/{0,1,s}
Applied Processor:
NaturalMI {miDimension = 2, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules, greedy = NoGreedy}
Proof:
We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation (containing no more than 1 non-zero interpretation-entries in the diagonal of the component-wise maxima):
The following argument positions are considered usable:
uargs(s) = {1}
Following symbols are considered usable:
{}
TcT has computed the following interpretation:
p(0) = [1]
[5]
p(1) = [0]
[1]
p(f) = [0 2] x1 + [3 4] x3 + [0]
[0 0] [0 1] [2]
p(g) = [1 1] x1 + [1 1] x2 + [0]
[4 1] [1 1] [4]
p(s) = [1 2] x1 + [1]
[0 0] [3]
Following rules are strictly oriented:
f(0(),1(),x) = [3 4] x + [10]
[0 1] [2]
> [3 4] x + [6]
[0 1] [2]
= f(s(x),x,x)
Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
f(x,y,s(z)) = [0 2] x + [3 6] z + [15]
[0 0] [0 0] [5]
>= [3 6] z + [15]
[0 0] [3]
= s(f(0(),1(),z))
g(x,y) = [1 1] x + [1 1] y + [0]
[4 1] [1 1] [4]
>= [1 0] x + [0]
[0 1] [0]
= x
g(x,y) = [1 1] x + [1 1] y + [0]
[4 1] [1 1] [4]
>= [1 0] y + [0]
[0 1] [0]
= y
*** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] ***
Considered Problem:
Strict DP Rules:
Strict TRS Rules:
Weak DP Rules:
Weak TRS Rules:
f(x,y,s(z)) -> s(f(0(),1(),z))
f(0(),1(),x) -> f(s(x),x,x)
g(x,y) -> x
g(x,y) -> y
Signature:
{f/3,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1}
Obligation:
Full
basic terms: {f,g}/{0,1,s}
Applied Processor:
EmptyProcessor
Proof:
The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).