WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
* Step 1: InnermostRuleRemoval WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            0() -> n__0()
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__0()) -> 0()
            activate(n__f(X)) -> f(activate(X))
            activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
            f(X) -> n__f(X)
            f(0()) -> cons(0(),n__f(n__s(n__0())))
            f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0())))
            p(s(X)) -> X
            s(X) -> n__s(X)
        - Signature:
            {0/0,activate/1,f/1,p/1,s/1} / {cons/2,n__0/0,n__f/1,n__s/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {0,activate,f,p,s} and constructors {cons,n__0,n__f,n__s}
    + Applied Processor:
        InnermostRuleRemoval
    + Details:
        Arguments of following rules are not normal-forms.
          f(0()) -> cons(0(),n__f(n__s(n__0())))
          f(s(0())) -> f(p(s(0())))
          p(s(X)) -> X
        All above mentioned rules can be savely removed.
* Step 2: Bounds WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            0() -> n__0()
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__0()) -> 0()
            activate(n__f(X)) -> f(activate(X))
            activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
            f(X) -> n__f(X)
            s(X) -> n__s(X)
        - Signature:
            {0/0,activate/1,f/1,p/1,s/1} / {cons/2,n__0/0,n__f/1,n__s/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {0,activate,f,p,s} and constructors {cons,n__0,n__f,n__s}
    + Applied Processor:
        Bounds {initialAutomaton = minimal, enrichment = match}
    + Details:
        The problem is match-bounded by 2.
        The enriched problem is compatible with follwoing automaton.
          0_0() -> 1
          0_1() -> 1
          0_1() -> 3
          activate_0(2) -> 1
          activate_1(2) -> 3
          cons_0(2,2) -> 1
          cons_0(2,2) -> 2
          cons_0(2,2) -> 3
          f_0(2) -> 1
          f_1(3) -> 1
          f_1(3) -> 3
          n__0_0() -> 1
          n__0_0() -> 2
          n__0_0() -> 3
          n__0_1() -> 1
          n__0_2() -> 1
          n__0_2() -> 3
          n__f_0(2) -> 1
          n__f_0(2) -> 2
          n__f_0(2) -> 3
          n__f_1(2) -> 1
          n__f_2(3) -> 1
          n__f_2(3) -> 3
          n__s_0(2) -> 1
          n__s_0(2) -> 2
          n__s_0(2) -> 3
          n__s_1(2) -> 1
          n__s_2(3) -> 1
          n__s_2(3) -> 3
          p_0(2) -> 1
          s_0(2) -> 1
          s_1(3) -> 1
          s_1(3) -> 3
          2 -> 1
          2 -> 3
* Step 3: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Weak TRS:
            0() -> n__0()
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__0()) -> 0()
            activate(n__f(X)) -> f(activate(X))
            activate(n__s(X)) -> s(activate(X))
            f(X) -> n__f(X)
            s(X) -> n__s(X)
        - Signature:
            {0/0,activate/1,f/1,p/1,s/1} / {cons/2,n__0/0,n__f/1,n__s/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {0,activate,f,p,s} and constructors {cons,n__0,n__f,n__s}
    + Applied Processor:
        EmptyProcessor
    + Details:
        The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).

WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))