Complexity measurement is a very interesting topic to tackle, but I am afraid that the fact that you did not specify the rules for the language used in the analysis makes it a little too hard to understand. I am interested on what you have to offer, and maybe this is a working paper, but I believe a paper on this subject is one which calls for extended explanation.
Maybe allow yourself to introduce the subject a little more, contextualize, propose your idea, show the tool you created in detail so that a reader understands how you are slicing a grammar into others (not talking about implementation; maybe explain the syntax of your proposed programs?).
Given your introduction, It does not feel like you are trying to advance the state-of-the-art, but even so, would be interesting to see a little more detail in why you think this is a good method. Perharps you should compare to other ones.
Thank you very much for the feedback! I would agree that “this is a working paper”. At the time (2017) I didn’t have any experience or training writing papers. I’ve been at an academic lab now for 1.5 yrs and so now am coauthor on 5 or 6 peer reviewed published papers, so am starting to figure out how to do this, and perhaps now might be a good time to find some collaborators and work on these things more and get them published.
The language is called Tree Notation and the rules are described in a few different places: https://github.com/breck7/jtree/blob/master/spec.txt, http://treenotation.org/faq.html, https://github.com/breck7/jtree/blob/master/papers/paper/treenotation.pdf, and here https://github.com/breck7/jtree/blob/master/papers/paper2/aGrammarNotationForTreeLanguages.pdf.
You can also “play” with the notation here http://treenotation.org/sandbox/, here http://treenotation.org/sandbox/build/, and here http://ohayo.computer.