/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/starexec_run_tct_rc /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml /export/starexec/sandbox2/output/output_files -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) * Step 1: Sum. WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: f(g(x),y,y) -> g(f(x,x,y)) - Signature: {f/3} / {g/1} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f} and constructors {g} + Applied Processor: Sum {left = someStrategy, right = someStrategy} + Details: () * Step 2: NaturalMI. WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: f(g(x),y,y) -> g(f(x,x,y)) - Signature: {f/3} / {g/1} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f} and constructors {g} + Applied Processor: NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, 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: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(g) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: all TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(f) = [12] x1 + [13] x3 + [7] p(g) = [1] x1 + [1] Following rules are strictly oriented: f(g(x),y,y) = [12] x + [13] y + [19] > [12] x + [13] y + [8] = g(f(x,x,y)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: * Step 3: EmptyProcessor. WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak TRS: f(g(x),y,y) -> g(f(x,x,y)) - Signature: {f/3} / {g/1} - Obligation: runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f} and constructors {g} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))