WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) * Step 1: DependencyPairs WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) main(x0) -> rev#1(x0) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2,main,rev#1} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} + Details: We add the following dependency tuples: Strict DPs append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. * Step 2: UsableRules WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) main(x0) -> rev#1(x0) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: UsableRules + Details: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() * Step 3: PredecessorEstimation WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: PredecessorEstimation {onSelection = all simple predecessor estimation selector} + Details: We estimate the number of application of {2,5} by application of Pre({2,5}) = {1,3,4}. Here rules are labelled as follows: 1: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) 2: append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() 3: main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) 4: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) 5: rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() * Step 4: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak DPs: append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: RemoveWeakSuffixes + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) -->_1 append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2():4 -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):1 2:S:main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) -->_1 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):3 -->_1 rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5():5 3:S:rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) -->_2 rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5():5 -->_1 append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2():4 -->_2 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):3 -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):1 4:W:append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() 5:W:rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 5: rev#1#(Nil()) -> c_5() 4: append#2#(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_2() * Step 5: RemoveHeads WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: RemoveHeads + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):1 2:S:main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)) -->_1 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):3 3:S:rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) -->_2 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):3 -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):1 Following roots of the dependency graph are removed, as the considered set of starting terms is closed under reduction with respect to these rules (modulo compound contexts). [(2,main#(x0) -> c_3(rev#1#(x0)))] * Step 6: Decompose WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: Decompose {onSelection = all cycle independent sub-graph, withBound = RelativeAdd} + Details: We analyse the complexity of following sub-problems (R) and (S). Problem (S) is obtained from the input problem by shifting strict rules from (R) into the weak component. Problem (R) - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) - Weak DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} Problem (S) - Strict DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} ** Step 6.a:1: PredecessorEstimationCP WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) - Weak DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: PredecessorEstimationCP {onSelectionCP = any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules, withComplexityPair = NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing}} + Details: We first use the processor NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing} to orient following rules strictly: 1: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. *** Step 6.a:1.a:1: NaturalPI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) - Weak DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just first alternative for predecessorEstimation on any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules} + Details: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(mixed(2)): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(c_1) = {1}, uargs(c_4) = {1,2} Following symbols are considered usable: {append#2,rev#1,append#2#,main#,rev#1#} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(Cons) = 1 + x2 p(Nil) = 1 p(append#2) = 1 + x1 p(main) = 2 + 2*x1 + 2*x1^2 p(rev#1) = x1 p(append#2#) = 3*x1*x2 p(main#) = x1^2 p(rev#1#) = 4*x1 + 4*x1^2 p(c_1) = 3 + x1 p(c_2) = 1 p(c_3) = 2 p(c_4) = x1 + x2 p(c_5) = 1 Following rules are strictly oriented: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) = 6 + 6*x4 > 3 + 6*x4 = c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) = 8 + 12*x1 + 4*x1^2 >= 10*x1 + 4*x1^2 = c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) = 2 + x4 >= 2 + x4 = Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) = 2 >= 2 = Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) = 1 + x1 >= 1 + x1 = append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) = 1 >= 1 = Nil() *** Step 6.a:1.a:2: Assumption WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: Assumption {assumed = Certificate {spaceUB = Unknown, spaceLB = Unknown, timeUB = Poly (Just 0), timeLB = Unknown}} + Details: () *** Step 6.a:1.b:1: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: RemoveWeakSuffixes + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:W:append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):1 2:W:rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) -->_2 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):2 -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):1 The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 2: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) 1: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) *** Step 6.a:1.b:2: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). ** Step 6.b:1: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak DPs: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: RemoveWeakSuffixes + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):2 -->_2 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):1 2:W:append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) -->_1 append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))):2 The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 2: append#2#(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> c_1(append#2#(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) ** Step 6.b:2: SimplifyRHS WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/2,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: SimplifyRHS + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)) -->_2 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(append#2#(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())),rev#1#(x1)):1 Due to missing edges in the depndency graph, the right-hand sides of following rules could be simplified: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) ** Step 6.b:3: UsableRules WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) - Weak TRS: append#2(Cons(x6,x4),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x6,append#2(x4,Cons(x2,Nil()))) append#2(Nil(),Cons(x2,Nil())) -> Cons(x2,Nil()) rev#1(Cons(x2,x1)) -> append#2(rev#1(x1),Cons(x2,Nil())) rev#1(Nil()) -> Nil() - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: UsableRules + Details: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) ** Step 6.b:4: PredecessorEstimationCP WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: PredecessorEstimationCP {onSelectionCP = any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules, withComplexityPair = NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing}} + Details: We first use the processor NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Nothing} to orient following rules strictly: 1: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. *** Step 6.b:4.a:1: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 1, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just first alternative for predecessorEstimation on any intersect of rules of CDG leaf and strict-rules} + Details: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(c_4) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(Cons) = [1] x2 + [1] p(Nil) = [0] p(append#2) = [2] x2 + [4] p(main) = [1] x1 + [0] p(rev#1) = [1] p(append#2#) = [4] x1 + [1] x2 + [1] p(main#) = [1] p(rev#1#) = [4] x1 + [0] p(c_1) = [0] p(c_2) = [0] p(c_3) = [1] x1 + [0] p(c_4) = [1] x1 + [0] p(c_5) = [1] Following rules are strictly oriented: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) = [4] x1 + [4] > [4] x1 + [0] = c_4(rev#1#(x1)) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: *** Step 6.b:4.a:2: Assumption WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: Assumption {assumed = Certificate {spaceUB = Unknown, spaceLB = Unknown, timeUB = Poly (Just 0), timeLB = Unknown}} + Details: () *** Step 6.b:4.b:1: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak DPs: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: RemoveWeakSuffixes + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:W:rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) -->_1 rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)):1 The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 1: rev#1#(Cons(x2,x1)) -> c_4(rev#1#(x1)) *** Step 6.b:4.b:2: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Signature: {append#2/2,main/1,rev#1/1,append#2#/2,main#/1,rev#1#/1} / {Cons/2,Nil/0,c_1/1,c_2/0,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {append#2#,main#,rev#1#} and constructors {Cons,Nil} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(?,O(n^2))