YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 0.00/0.25 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Strict Trs: 0.00/0.25 { f(0(), y) -> 0() 0.00/0.25 , f(s(x), y) -> f(f(x, y), y) } 0.00/0.25 Obligation: 0.00/0.25 runtime complexity 0.00/0.25 Answer: 0.00/0.25 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We add the following weak dependency pairs: 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Strict DPs: 0.00/0.25 { f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() 0.00/0.25 , f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 and mark the set of starting terms. 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 0.00/0.25 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Strict DPs: 0.00/0.25 { f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() 0.00/0.25 , f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 Strict Trs: 0.00/0.25 { f(0(), y) -> 0() 0.00/0.25 , f(s(x), y) -> f(f(x, y), y) } 0.00/0.25 Obligation: 0.00/0.25 runtime complexity 0.00/0.25 Answer: 0.00/0.25 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 The weightgap principle applies (using the following constant 0.00/0.25 growth matrix-interpretation) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 The following argument positions are usable: 0.00/0.25 Uargs(f) = {1}, Uargs(f^#) = {1}, Uargs(c_2) = {1} 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 TcT has computed the following constructor-restricted matrix 0.00/0.25 interpretation. 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [f](x1, x2) = [1 1] x1 + [0] 0.00/0.25 [0 0] [1] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [0] = [0] 0.00/0.25 [1] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [s](x1) = [1 0] x1 + [2] 0.00/0.25 [0 1] [2] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [f^#](x1, x2) = [1 1] x1 + [2 2] x2 + [0] 0.00/0.25 [0 0] [2 2] [0] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [c_1] = [1] 0.00/0.25 [2] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [c_2](x1) = [1 0] x1 + [1] 0.00/0.25 [0 1] [2] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 The order satisfies the following ordering constraints: 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [f(0(), y)] = [1] 0.00/0.25 [1] 0.00/0.25 > [0] 0.00/0.25 [1] 0.00/0.25 = [0()] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [f(s(x), y)] = [1 1] x + [4] 0.00/0.25 [0 0] [1] 0.00/0.25 > [1 1] x + [1] 0.00/0.25 [0 0] [1] 0.00/0.25 = [f(f(x, y), y)] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [f^#(0(), y)] = [2 2] y + [1] 0.00/0.25 [2 2] [0] 0.00/0.25 ? [1] 0.00/0.25 [2] 0.00/0.25 = [c_1()] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 [f^#(s(x), y)] = [2 2] y + [1 1] x + [4] 0.00/0.25 [2 2] [0 0] [0] 0.00/0.25 ? [2 2] y + [1 1] x + [2] 0.00/0.25 [2 2] [0 0] [2] 0.00/0.25 = [c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y))] 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 0.00/0.25 certificate YES(?,O(n^1)). 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Strict DPs: 0.00/0.25 { f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() 0.00/0.25 , f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 Weak Trs: 0.00/0.25 { f(0(), y) -> 0() 0.00/0.25 , f(s(x), y) -> f(f(x, y), y) } 0.00/0.25 Obligation: 0.00/0.25 runtime complexity 0.00/0.25 Answer: 0.00/0.25 YES(?,O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We estimate the number of application of {1} by applications of 0.00/0.25 Pre({1}) = {2}. Here rules are labeled as follows: 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 DPs: 0.00/0.25 { 1: f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() 0.00/0.25 , 2: f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 0.00/0.25 certificate YES(?,O(n^1)). 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Strict DPs: { f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 Weak DPs: { f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() } 0.00/0.25 Weak Trs: 0.00/0.25 { f(0(), y) -> 0() 0.00/0.25 , f(s(x), y) -> f(f(x, y), y) } 0.00/0.25 Obligation: 0.00/0.25 runtime complexity 0.00/0.25 Answer: 0.00/0.25 YES(?,O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We estimate the number of application of {1} by applications of 0.00/0.25 Pre({1}) = {}. Here rules are labeled as follows: 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 DPs: 0.00/0.25 { 1: f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) 0.00/0.25 , 2: f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() } 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 0.00/0.25 certificate YES(?,O(n^1)). 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Weak DPs: 0.00/0.25 { f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() 0.00/0.25 , f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 Weak Trs: 0.00/0.25 { f(0(), y) -> 0() 0.00/0.25 , f(s(x), y) -> f(f(x, y), y) } 0.00/0.25 Obligation: 0.00/0.25 runtime complexity 0.00/0.25 Answer: 0.00/0.25 YES(?,O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is 0.00/0.25 closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 { f^#(0(), y) -> c_1() 0.00/0.25 , f^#(s(x), y) -> c_2(f^#(f(x, y), y)) } 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 0.00/0.25 certificate YES(?,O(n^1)). 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Weak Trs: 0.00/0.25 { f(0(), y) -> 0() 0.00/0.25 , f(s(x), y) -> f(f(x, y), y) } 0.00/0.25 Obligation: 0.00/0.25 runtime complexity 0.00/0.25 Answer: 0.00/0.25 YES(?,O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 We employ 'linear path analysis' using the following approximated 0.00/0.25 dependency graph: 0.00/0.25 empty 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 0.00/0.25 Hurray, we answered YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 0.00/0.25 EOF