WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) * Step 1: WeightGap WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: plus(plus(X,Y),Z) -> plus(X,plus(Y,Z)) times(X,s(Y)) -> plus(X,times(Y,X)) - Signature: {plus/2,times/2} / {s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {plus,times} and constructors {s} + Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} + Details: 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(plus) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: all TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(plus) = [1] x2 + [0] p(s) = [1] x1 + [1] p(times) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [8] Following rules are strictly oriented: times(X,s(Y)) = [1] X + [1] Y + [9] > [1] X + [1] Y + [8] = plus(X,times(Y,X)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: plus(plus(X,Y),Z) = [1] Z + [0] >= [1] Z + [0] = plus(X,plus(Y,Z)) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. * Step 2: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: plus(plus(X,Y),Z) -> plus(X,plus(Y,Z)) - Weak TRS: times(X,s(Y)) -> plus(X,times(Y,X)) - Signature: {plus/2,times/2} / {s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {plus,times} and constructors {s} + Applied Processor: NaturalMI {miDimension = 2, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules} + Details: 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(plus) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: {plus,times} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(plus) = [0 1] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [0] [0 2] [0 1] [1] p(s) = [1 1] x1 + [2] [0 0] [1] p(times) = [1 1] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [6] [2 2] [2 0] [4] Following rules are strictly oriented: plus(plus(X,Y),Z) = [0 2] X + [0 1] Y + [1 0] Z + [1] [0 4] [0 2] [0 1] [3] > [0 1] X + [0 1] Y + [1 0] Z + [0] [0 2] [0 2] [0 1] [2] = plus(X,plus(Y,Z)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: times(X,s(Y)) = [1 1] X + [1 1] Y + [8] [2 2] [2 2] [8] >= [1 1] X + [1 1] Y + [6] [2 2] [2 2] [5] = plus(X,times(Y,X)) * Step 3: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak TRS: plus(plus(X,Y),Z) -> plus(X,plus(Y,Z)) times(X,s(Y)) -> plus(X,times(Y,X)) - Signature: {plus/2,times/2} / {s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {plus,times} and constructors {s} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))