WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),O(n^2)) * Step 1: Sum WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: +(x,0()) -> x +(x,s(y)) -> s(+(x,y)) f(0()) -> 1() f(s(x)) -> g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) -> y g(s(x),y) -> g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,s(+(y,x))) - Signature: {+/2,f/1,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+,f,g} and constructors {0,1,s} + Applied Processor: Sum {left = someStrategy, right = someStrategy} + Details: () ** Step 1.a:1: DecreasingLoops WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),?) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: +(x,0()) -> x +(x,s(y)) -> s(+(x,y)) f(0()) -> 1() f(s(x)) -> g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) -> y g(s(x),y) -> g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,s(+(y,x))) - Signature: {+/2,f/1,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+,f,g} and constructors {0,1,s} + Applied Processor: DecreasingLoops {bound = AnyLoop, narrow = 10} + Details: The system has following decreasing Loops: +(x,y){y -> s(y)} = +(x,s(y)) ->^+ s(+(x,y)) = C[+(x,y) = +(x,y){}] ** Step 1.b:1: NaturalPI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: +(x,0()) -> x +(x,s(y)) -> s(+(x,y)) f(0()) -> 1() f(s(x)) -> g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) -> y g(s(x),y) -> g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,s(+(y,x))) - Signature: {+/2,f/1,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+,f,g} and constructors {0,1,s} + Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Linear, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules} + Details: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(linear): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(g) = {2}, uargs(s) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {+,f,g} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(+) = x1 p(0) = 2 p(1) = 14 p(f) = 8 + 10*x1 p(g) = 1 + 2*x1 + 4*x2 p(s) = x1 Following rules are strictly oriented: f(0()) = 28 > 14 = 1() f(s(x)) = 8 + 10*x > 1 + 6*x = g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) = 5 + 4*y > y = y Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: +(x,0()) = x >= x = x +(x,s(y)) = x >= x = s(+(x,y)) g(s(x),y) = 1 + 2*x + 4*y >= 1 + 2*x + 4*y = g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) = 1 + 2*x + 4*y >= 1 + 2*x + 4*y = g(x,s(+(y,x))) ** Step 1.b:2: NaturalPI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: +(x,0()) -> x +(x,s(y)) -> s(+(x,y)) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,s(+(y,x))) - Weak TRS: f(0()) -> 1() f(s(x)) -> g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) -> y - Signature: {+/2,f/1,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+,f,g} and constructors {0,1,s} + Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules} + Details: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(mixed(2)): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(g) = {2}, uargs(s) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {+,f,g} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(+) = x1 + x2 p(0) = 1 p(1) = 7 p(f) = 7*x1^2 p(g) = 5 + 6*x1 + 2*x1^2 + 2*x2 p(s) = 1 + x1 Following rules are strictly oriented: +(x,0()) = 1 + x > x = x g(s(x),y) = 13 + 10*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y > 7 + 8*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y = g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) = 13 + 10*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y > 7 + 8*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y = g(x,s(+(y,x))) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: +(x,s(y)) = 1 + x + y >= 1 + x + y = s(+(x,y)) f(0()) = 7 >= 7 = 1() f(s(x)) = 7 + 14*x + 7*x^2 >= 7 + 8*x + 2*x^2 = g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) = 13 + 2*y >= y = y ** Step 1.b:3: NaturalPI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: +(x,s(y)) -> s(+(x,y)) - Weak TRS: +(x,0()) -> x f(0()) -> 1() f(s(x)) -> g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) -> y g(s(x),y) -> g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,s(+(y,x))) - Signature: {+/2,f/1,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+,f,g} and constructors {0,1,s} + Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules} + Details: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(mixed(2)): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(g) = {2}, uargs(s) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {+,f,g} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(+) = 1 + x1 + 2*x2 p(0) = 1 p(1) = 4 p(f) = 3 + x1 + 4*x1^2 p(g) = 4*x1 + 2*x1^2 + 2*x2 p(s) = 1 + x1 Following rules are strictly oriented: +(x,s(y)) = 3 + x + 2*y > 2 + x + 2*y = s(+(x,y)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: +(x,0()) = 3 + x >= x = x f(0()) = 8 >= 4 = 1() f(s(x)) = 8 + 9*x + 4*x^2 >= 2 + 6*x + 2*x^2 = g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) = 6 + 2*y >= y = y g(s(x),y) = 6 + 8*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y >= 6 + 8*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y = g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) = 6 + 8*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y >= 4 + 8*x + 2*x^2 + 2*y = g(x,s(+(y,x))) ** Step 1.b:4: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak TRS: +(x,0()) -> x +(x,s(y)) -> s(+(x,y)) f(0()) -> 1() f(s(x)) -> g(x,s(x)) g(0(),y) -> y g(s(x),y) -> g(x,+(y,s(x))) g(s(x),y) -> g(x,s(+(y,x))) - Signature: {+/2,f/1,g/2} / {0/0,1/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+,f,g} and constructors {0,1,s} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(Omega(n^1),O(n^2))