WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) * Step 1: DependencyPairs WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: copy(0(),y,z) -> f(z) copy(s(x),y,z) -> copy(x,y,cons(f(y),z)) f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy,f} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} + Details: We add the following dependency tuples: Strict DPs copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. * Step 2: PredecessorEstimation WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() - Weak TRS: copy(0(),y,z) -> f(z) copy(s(x),y,z) -> copy(x,y,cons(f(y),z)) f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + Applied Processor: PredecessorEstimation {onSelection = all simple predecessor estimation selector} + Details: We estimate the number of application of {3,4} by application of Pre({3,4}) = {1,2}. Here rules are labelled as follows: 1: copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) 2: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) 3: f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) 4: f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() * Step 3: PredecessorEstimation WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) - Weak DPs: f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() - Weak TRS: copy(0(),y,z) -> f(z) copy(s(x),y,z) -> copy(x,y,cons(f(y),z)) f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + 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: copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) 2: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) 3: f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) 4: f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() * Step 4: RemoveWeakSuffixes WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) - Weak DPs: copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() - Weak TRS: copy(0(),y,z) -> f(z) copy(s(x),y,z) -> copy(x,y,cons(f(y),z)) f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + Applied Processor: RemoveWeakSuffixes + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) -->_1 copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)):2 -->_2 f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4():4 -->_1 copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)):1 2:W:copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) -->_1 f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4():4 3:W:f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) 4:W:f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 3: f#(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> c_3(copy#(n(),y,z)) 2: copy#(0(),y,z) -> c_1(f#(z)) 4: f#(cons(nil(),y)) -> c_4() * Step 5: SimplifyRHS WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) - Weak TRS: copy(0(),y,z) -> f(z) copy(s(x),y,z) -> copy(x,y,cons(f(y),z)) f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/2,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + Applied Processor: SimplifyRHS + Details: Consider the dependency graph 1:S:copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)) -->_1 copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z)),f#(y)):1 Due to missing edges in the depndency graph, the right-hand sides of following rules could be simplified: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z))) * Step 6: UsableRules WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z))) - Weak TRS: copy(0(),y,z) -> f(z) copy(s(x),y,z) -> copy(x,y,cons(f(y),z)) f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + Applied Processor: UsableRules + Details: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z))) * Step 7: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict DPs: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z))) - Weak TRS: f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + 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(c_2) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {copy#,f#} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [1] p(cons) = [8] p(copy) = [4] x1 + [1] x2 + [1] x3 + [0] p(f) = [2] x1 + [0] p(n) = [4] p(nil) = [0] p(s) = [1] x1 + [1] p(copy#) = [8] x1 + [1] x2 + [0] p(f#) = [1] x1 + [1] p(c_1) = [2] p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [5] p(c_3) = [1] x1 + [1] p(c_4) = [8] Following rules are strictly oriented: copy#(s(x),y,z) = [8] x + [1] y + [8] > [8] x + [1] y + [5] = c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z))) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: * Step 8: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak DPs: copy#(s(x),y,z) -> c_2(copy#(x,y,cons(f(y),z))) - Weak TRS: f(cons(f(cons(nil(),y)),z)) -> copy(n(),y,z) f(cons(nil(),y)) -> y - Signature: {copy/3,f/1,copy#/3,f#/1} / {0/0,cons/2,n/0,nil/0,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {copy#,f#} and constructors {0,cons,n,nil,s} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))