WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
* Step 1: DependencyPairs WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            and(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> and(y,band(x,z),x)
        - Signature:
            {and/3} / {band/2,not/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {and} and constructors {band,not}
    + Applied Processor:
        DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT}
    + Details:
        We add the following dependency tuples:
        
        Strict DPs
          and#(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> c_1(and#(y,band(x,z),x))
        Weak DPs
          
        
        and mark the set of starting terms.
* Step 2: UsableRules WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            and#(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> c_1(and#(y,band(x,z),x))
        - Weak TRS:
            and(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> and(y,band(x,z),x)
        - Signature:
            {and/3,and#/3} / {band/2,not/1,c_1/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {and#} and constructors {band,not}
    + Applied Processor:
        UsableRules
    + Details:
        We replace rewrite rules by usable rules:
          and#(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> c_1(and#(y,band(x,z),x))
* Step 3: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            and#(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> c_1(and#(y,band(x,z),x))
        - Signature:
            {and/3,and#/3} / {band/2,not/1,c_1/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {and#} and constructors {band,not}
    + Applied Processor:
        NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 0, 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 0 non-zero interpretation-entries in the diagonal of the component-wise maxima):
        The following argument positions are considered usable:
          uargs(c_1) = {1}
        
        Following symbols are considered usable:
          {and#}
        TcT has computed the following interpretation:
           p(and) = [8] x1 + [4] x3 + [1]
          p(band) = [3]                  
           p(not) = [4]                  
          p(and#) = [3] x1 + [3] x2 + [4]
           p(c_1) = [1] x1 + [0]         
        
        Following rules are strictly oriented:
        and#(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) = [3] y + [16]            
                                   > [3] y + [13]            
                                   = c_1(and#(y,band(x,z),x))
        
        
        Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
        
* Step 4: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Weak DPs:
            and#(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) -> c_1(and#(y,band(x,z),x))
        - Signature:
            {and/3,and#/3} / {band/2,not/1,c_1/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {and#} and constructors {band,not}
    + Applied Processor:
        EmptyProcessor
    + Details:
        The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).

WORST_CASE(?,O(1))