MAYBE * Step 1: DependencyPairs MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: +(0(),x) -> x +(1(),x) -> +(+(0(),1()),x) - Signature: {+/2} / {0/0,1/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+} and constructors {0,1} + Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} + Details: We add the following dependency tuples: Strict DPs +#(0(),x) -> c_1() +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. * Step 2: UsableRules MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: +#(0(),x) -> c_1() +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) - Weak TRS: +(0(),x) -> x +(1(),x) -> +(+(0(),1()),x) - Signature: {+/2,+#/2} / {0/0,1/0,c_1/0,c_2/2} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+#} and constructors {0,1} + Applied Processor: UsableRules + Details: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: +(0(),x) -> x +#(0(),x) -> c_1() +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) * Step 3: PredecessorEstimation MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: +#(0(),x) -> c_1() +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) - Weak TRS: +(0(),x) -> x - Signature: {+/2,+#/2} / {0/0,1/0,c_1/0,c_2/2} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+#} and constructors {0,1} + Applied Processor: PredecessorEstimation {onSelection = all simple predecessor estimation selector} + Details: We estimate the number of application of {1} by application of Pre({1}) = {2}. Here rules are labelled as follows: 1: +#(0(),x) -> c_1() 2: +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) * Step 4: RemoveWeakSuffixes MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) - Weak DPs: +#(0(),x) -> c_1() - Weak TRS: +(0(),x) -> x - Signature: {+/2,+#/2} / {0/0,1/0,c_1/0,c_2/2} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+#} and constructors {0,1} + Applied Processor: RemoveWeakSuffixes + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:+#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) -->_2 +#(0(),x) -> c_1():2 -->_1 +#(0(),x) -> c_1():2 -->_1 +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())):1 2:W:+#(0(),x) -> c_1() The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 2: +#(0(),x) -> c_1() * Step 5: SimplifyRHS MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) - Weak TRS: +(0(),x) -> x - Signature: {+/2,+#/2} / {0/0,1/0,c_1/0,c_2/2} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+#} and constructors {0,1} + Applied Processor: SimplifyRHS + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:+#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())) -->_1 +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x),+#(0(),1())):1 Due to missing edges in the depndency graph, the right-hand sides of following rules could be simplified: +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x)) * Step 6: Failure MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: +#(1(),x) -> c_2(+#(+(0(),1()),x)) - Weak TRS: +(0(),x) -> x - Signature: {+/2,+#/2} / {0/0,1/0,c_1/0,c_2/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {+#} and constructors {0,1} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is still open. MAYBE