* Step 1: Sum WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
Sum {left = someStrategy, right = someStrategy}
+ Details:
()
** Step 1.a:1: DecreasingLoops WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),?)
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
DecreasingLoops {bound = AnyLoop, narrow = 10}
+ Details:
The system has following decreasing Loops:
:(x,z){x -> +(x,y)} =
:(+(x,y),z) ->^+ +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
= C[:(x,z) = :(x,z){}]
** Step 1.b:1: DependencyPairs WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT}
+ Details:
We add the following dependency tuples:
Strict DPs
:#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a())))
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
Weak DPs
and mark the set of starting terms.
** Step 1.b:2: PredecessorEstimation WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a())))
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
PredecessorEstimation {onSelection = all simple predecessor estimation selector}
+ Details:
We estimate the number of application of
{1}
by application of
Pre({1}) = {2,3}.
Here rules are labelled as follows:
1: :#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a())))
2: :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
3: :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
** Step 1.b:3: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak DPs:
:#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a())))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
RemoveWeakSuffixes
+ Details:
Consider the dependency graph
1:S::#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
-->_2 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_1 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_2 :#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a()))):3
-->_1 :#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a()))):3
-->_2 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
-->_1 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
2:S::#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
-->_2 :#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a()))):3
-->_1 :#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a()))):3
-->_2 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_1 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_2 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
-->_1 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
3:W::#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a())))
The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed.
3: :#(z,+(x,f(y))) -> c_1(:#(g(z,y),+(x,a())))
** Step 1.b:4: PredecessorEstimationCP WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
PredecessorEstimationCP {onSelectionCP = any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules, withComplexityPair = NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing}}
+ Details:
We first use the processor NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing} to orient following rules strictly:
1: :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
*** Step 1.b:4.a:1: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just first alternative for predecessorEstimation on any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules}
+ Details:
We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
The following argument positions are considered usable:
uargs(c_2) = {1,2},
uargs(c_3) = {1,2}
Following symbols are considered usable:
{:#}
TcT has computed the following interpretation:
p(+) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [2]
p(:) = [2] x1 + [2] x2 + [0]
p(a) = [0]
p(f) = [1] x1 + [0]
p(g) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [0]
p(:#) = [8] x1 + [0]
p(c_1) = [0]
p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [3]
p(c_3) = [2] x1 + [1] x2 + [0]
Following rules are strictly oriented:
:#(+(x,y),z) = [8] x + [8] y + [16]
> [8] x + [8] y + [3]
= c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
:#(:(x,y),z) = [16] x + [16] y + [0]
>= [16] x + [8] y + [0]
= c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
*** Step 1.b:4.a:2: Assumption WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
Assumption {assumed = Certificate {spaceUB = Unknown, spaceLB = Unknown, timeUB = Poly (Just 0), timeLB = Unknown}}
+ Details:
()
*** Step 1.b:4.b:1: PredecessorEstimationCP WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
PredecessorEstimationCP {onSelectionCP = any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules, withComplexityPair = NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing}}
+ Details:
We first use the processor NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing} to orient following rules strictly:
1: :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component.
**** Step 1.b:4.b:1.a:1: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Strict DPs:
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just first alternative for predecessorEstimation on any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules}
+ Details:
We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
The following argument positions are considered usable:
uargs(c_2) = {1,2},
uargs(c_3) = {1,2}
Following symbols are considered usable:
{:#}
TcT has computed the following interpretation:
p(+) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [1]
p(:) = [4] x1 + [2] x2 + [1]
p(a) = [8]
p(f) = [4]
p(g) = [3]
p(:#) = [1] x1 + [0]
p(c_1) = [0]
p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [1]
p(c_3) = [4] x1 + [1] x2 + [0]
Following rules are strictly oriented:
:#(:(x,y),z) = [4] x + [2] y + [1]
> [4] x + [1] y + [0]
= c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
:#(+(x,y),z) = [1] x + [1] y + [1]
>= [1] x + [1] y + [1]
= c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
**** Step 1.b:4.b:1.a:2: Assumption WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Weak DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
Assumption {assumed = Certificate {spaceUB = Unknown, spaceLB = Unknown, timeUB = Poly (Just 0), timeLB = Unknown}}
+ Details:
()
**** Step 1.b:4.b:1.b:1: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Weak DPs:
:#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
:#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
RemoveWeakSuffixes
+ Details:
Consider the dependency graph
1:W::#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
-->_2 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_1 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_2 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
-->_1 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
2:W::#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
-->_2 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_1 :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z)):2
-->_2 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
-->_1 :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z)):1
The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed.
1: :#(+(x,y),z) -> c_2(:#(x,z),:#(y,z))
2: :#(:(x,y),z) -> c_3(:#(x,:(y,z)),:#(y,z))
**** Step 1.b:4.b:1.b:2: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
+ Considered Problem:
- Weak TRS:
:(z,+(x,f(y))) -> :(g(z,y),+(x,a()))
:(+(x,y),z) -> +(:(x,z),:(y,z))
:(:(x,y),z) -> :(x,:(y,z))
- Signature:
{:/2,:#/2} / {+/2,a/0,f/1,g/2,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/2}
- Obligation:
innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {:#} and constructors {+,a,f,g}
+ Applied Processor:
EmptyProcessor
+ Details:
The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).
WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),O(n^1))