WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) * Step 1: NaturalPI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: addlist(Cons(x,xs'),Cons(S(0()),xs)) -> Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Cons(S(0()),xs'),Cons(x,xs)) -> Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Nil(),ys) -> Nil() goal(xs,ys) -> addlist(xs,ys) notEmpty(Cons(x,xs)) -> True() notEmpty(Nil()) -> False() - Signature: {addlist/2,goal/2,notEmpty/1} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {addlist,goal,notEmpty} and constructors {0,Cons,False,Nil ,S,True} + Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Linear, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules} + Details: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(linear): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(Cons) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: {addlist,goal,notEmpty} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = 3 p(Cons) = x1 + x2 p(False) = 6 p(Nil) = 2 p(S) = 1 + x1 p(True) = 8 p(addlist) = 9 + 4*x1 + 4*x2 p(goal) = 10 + 6*x1 + 5*x2 p(notEmpty) = 8 Following rules are strictly oriented: addlist(Cons(x,xs'),Cons(S(0()),xs)) = 25 + 4*x + 4*xs + 4*xs' > 10 + x + 4*xs + 4*xs' = Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Cons(S(0()),xs'),Cons(x,xs)) = 25 + 4*x + 4*xs + 4*xs' > 10 + x + 4*xs + 4*xs' = Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Nil(),ys) = 17 + 4*ys > 2 = Nil() goal(xs,ys) = 10 + 6*xs + 5*ys > 9 + 4*xs + 4*ys = addlist(xs,ys) notEmpty(Nil()) = 8 > 6 = False() Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: notEmpty(Cons(x,xs)) = 8 >= 8 = True() * Step 2: NaturalMI WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1)) + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: notEmpty(Cons(x,xs)) -> True() - Weak TRS: addlist(Cons(x,xs'),Cons(S(0()),xs)) -> Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Cons(S(0()),xs'),Cons(x,xs)) -> Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Nil(),ys) -> Nil() goal(xs,ys) -> addlist(xs,ys) notEmpty(Nil()) -> False() - Signature: {addlist/2,goal/2,notEmpty/1} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {addlist,goal,notEmpty} and constructors {0,Cons,False,Nil ,S,True} + 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(Cons) = {2} Following symbols are considered usable: {addlist,goal,notEmpty} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [0] p(Cons) = [1] x2 + [0] p(False) = [3] p(Nil) = [0] p(S) = [1] x1 + [0] p(True) = [2] p(addlist) = [0] p(goal) = [0] p(notEmpty) = [3] Following rules are strictly oriented: notEmpty(Cons(x,xs)) = [3] > [2] = True() Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: addlist(Cons(x,xs'),Cons(S(0()),xs)) = [0] >= [0] = Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Cons(S(0()),xs'),Cons(x,xs)) = [0] >= [0] = Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Nil(),ys) = [0] >= [0] = Nil() goal(xs,ys) = [0] >= [0] = addlist(xs,ys) notEmpty(Nil()) = [3] >= [3] = False() * Step 3: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1)) + Considered Problem: - Weak TRS: addlist(Cons(x,xs'),Cons(S(0()),xs)) -> Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Cons(S(0()),xs'),Cons(x,xs)) -> Cons(S(x),addlist(xs',xs)) addlist(Nil(),ys) -> Nil() goal(xs,ys) -> addlist(xs,ys) notEmpty(Cons(x,xs)) -> True() notEmpty(Nil()) -> False() - Signature: {addlist/2,goal/2,notEmpty/1} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {addlist,goal,notEmpty} and constructors {0,Cons,False,Nil ,S,True} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1). WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))