WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
* Step 1: WeightGap 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:
        WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny}
    + Details:
        The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation:
          We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
          The following argument positions are considered usable:
            none
          
          Following symbols are considered usable:
            all
          TcT has computed the following interpretation:
             p(and) = [3] x1 + [10] x2 + [4]
            p(band) = [2]                   
             p(not) = [8]                   
          
          Following rules are strictly oriented:
          and(not(not(x)),y,not(z)) = [10] y + [28]     
                                    > [3] y + [24]      
                                    = and(y,band(x,z),x)
          
          
          Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
          
        Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
* Step 2: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Weak 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:
        EmptyProcessor
    + Details:
        The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).

WORST_CASE(?,O(1))