*** 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).