*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^2))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: *(0(),y) -> 0() *(s(x),y) -> +(y,*(x,y)) -(x,0()) -> x -(0(),y) -> 0() -(s(x),s(y)) -> -(x,y) exp(x,0()) -> s(0()) exp(x,s(y)) -> *(x,exp(x,y)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {*/2,-/2,exp/2} / {+/2,0/0,s/1} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {*,-,exp}/{+,0,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(*) = {2}, uargs(+) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(*) = [1] x2 + [2] p(+) = [1] x2 + [0] p(-) = [4] x1 + [1] x2 + [6] p(0) = [0] p(exp) = [10] x2 + [1] p(s) = [1] x1 + [1] Following rules are strictly oriented: *(0(),y) = [1] y + [2] > [0] = 0() -(x,0()) = [4] x + [6] > [1] x + [0] = x -(0(),y) = [1] y + [6] > [0] = 0() -(s(x),s(y)) = [4] x + [1] y + [11] > [4] x + [1] y + [6] = -(x,y) exp(x,s(y)) = [10] y + [11] > [10] y + [3] = *(x,exp(x,y)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: *(s(x),y) = [1] y + [2] >= [1] y + [2] = +(y,*(x,y)) exp(x,0()) = [1] >= [1] = s(0()) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^2))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: *(s(x),y) -> +(y,*(x,y)) exp(x,0()) -> s(0()) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: *(0(),y) -> 0() -(x,0()) -> x -(0(),y) -> 0() -(s(x),s(y)) -> -(x,y) exp(x,s(y)) -> *(x,exp(x,y)) Signature: {*/2,-/2,exp/2} / {+/2,0/0,s/1} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {*,-,exp}/{+,0,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(*) = {2}, uargs(+) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(*) = [1] x2 + [0] p(+) = [1] x2 + [0] p(-) = [2] x1 + [0] p(0) = [0] p(exp) = [7] p(s) = [1] x1 + [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: exp(x,0()) = [7] > [0] = s(0()) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: *(0(),y) = [1] y + [0] >= [0] = 0() *(s(x),y) = [1] y + [0] >= [1] y + [0] = +(y,*(x,y)) -(x,0()) = [2] x + [0] >= [1] x + [0] = x -(0(),y) = [0] >= [0] = 0() -(s(x),s(y)) = [2] x + [0] >= [2] x + [0] = -(x,y) exp(x,s(y)) = [7] >= [7] = *(x,exp(x,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^2))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: *(s(x),y) -> +(y,*(x,y)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: *(0(),y) -> 0() -(x,0()) -> x -(0(),y) -> 0() -(s(x),s(y)) -> -(x,y) exp(x,0()) -> s(0()) exp(x,s(y)) -> *(x,exp(x,y)) Signature: {*/2,-/2,exp/2} / {+/2,0/0,s/1} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {*,-,exp}/{+,0,s} Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules, greedy = NoGreedy} Proof: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(mixed(2)): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(*) = {2}, uargs(+) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: {*,-,exp} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(*) = x1 + x2 p(+) = x2 p(-) = 4*x1 + 2*x1^2 p(0) = 1 p(exp) = 2*x1*x2 + 2*x2 p(s) = 1 + x1 Following rules are strictly oriented: *(s(x),y) = 1 + x + y > x + y = +(y,*(x,y)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: *(0(),y) = 1 + y >= 1 = 0() -(x,0()) = 4*x + 2*x^2 >= x = x -(0(),y) = 6 >= 1 = 0() -(s(x),s(y)) = 6 + 8*x + 2*x^2 >= 4*x + 2*x^2 = -(x,y) exp(x,0()) = 2 + 2*x >= 2 = s(0()) exp(x,s(y)) = 2 + 2*x + 2*x*y + 2*y >= x + 2*x*y + 2*y = *(x,exp(x,y)) *** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: *(0(),y) -> 0() *(s(x),y) -> +(y,*(x,y)) -(x,0()) -> x -(0(),y) -> 0() -(s(x),s(y)) -> -(x,y) exp(x,0()) -> s(0()) exp(x,s(y)) -> *(x,exp(x,y)) Signature: {*/2,-/2,exp/2} / {+/2,0/0,s/1} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {*,-,exp}/{+,0,s} Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor Proof: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).