* Step 1: Bounds WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            active(f(x)) -> f(active(x))
            active(f(x)) -> mark(x)
            check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x))
            check(f(x)) -> f(check(x))
            f(found(x)) -> found(f(x))
            f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x))
            f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x))
            match(X(),x) -> proper(x)
            proper(c()) -> ok(c())
            start(ok(x)) -> found(x)
            top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c()))
            top(found(x)) -> top(active(x))
            top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x))
        - Signature:
            {active/1,check/1,f/1,match/2,proper/1,start/1,top/1} / {X/0,c/0,found/1,mark/1,ok/1}
        - Obligation:
             runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {active,check,f,match,proper,start,top} and constructors {X,c,found
            ,mark,ok}
    + Applied Processor:
        Bounds {initialAutomaton = minimal, enrichment = match}
    + Details:
        The problem is match-bounded by 4.
        The enriched problem is compatible with follwoing automaton.
          X_0() -> 2
          X_1() -> 5
          X_2() -> 10
          X_3() -> 15
          X_4() -> 20
          active_0(2) -> 1
          active_1(2) -> 7
          active_2(2) -> 12
          active_2(6) -> 11
          c_0() -> 2
          c_1() -> 6
          c_2() -> 2
          check_0(2) -> 1
          check_1(2) -> 7
          check_2(2) -> 12
          check_2(6) -> 11
          check_3(2) -> 16
          f_0(2) -> 1
          f_1(2) -> 6
          f_1(5) -> 4
          f_2(10) -> 9
          f_2(12) -> 11
          f_3(15) -> 14
          f_4(20) -> 19
          found_0(2) -> 2
          found_1(2) -> 1
          found_1(6) -> 1
          found_1(6) -> 6
          mark_0(2) -> 2
          mark_1(6) -> 1
          mark_1(6) -> 6
          mark_2(2) -> 11
          match_0(2,2) -> 1
          match_1(4,2) -> 3
          match_2(9,2) -> 8
          match_3(14,2) -> 17
          match_3(14,6) -> 13
          match_4(19,2) -> 18
          ok_0(2) -> 2
          ok_1(6) -> 1
          ok_1(6) -> 6
          ok_2(2) -> 1
          proper_0(2) -> 1
          proper_1(2) -> 1
          start_0(2) -> 1
          start_1(3) -> 1
          start_2(8) -> 7
          start_3(13) -> 11
          start_3(17) -> 12
          start_4(18) -> 16
          top_0(2) -> 1
          top_1(6) -> 1
          top_1(7) -> 1
          top_2(11) -> 1
          top_3(16) -> 1
* Step 2: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Weak TRS:
            active(f(x)) -> f(active(x))
            active(f(x)) -> mark(x)
            check(x) -> start(match(f(X()),x))
            check(f(x)) -> f(check(x))
            f(found(x)) -> found(f(x))
            f(mark(x)) -> mark(f(x))
            f(ok(x)) -> ok(f(x))
            match(X(),x) -> proper(x)
            proper(c()) -> ok(c())
            start(ok(x)) -> found(x)
            top(active(c())) -> top(mark(c()))
            top(found(x)) -> top(active(x))
            top(mark(x)) -> top(check(x))
        - Signature:
            {active/1,check/1,f/1,match/2,proper/1,start/1,top/1} / {X/0,c/0,found/1,mark/1,ok/1}
        - Obligation:
             runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {active,check,f,match,proper,start,top} and constructors {X,c,found
            ,mark,ok}
    + Applied Processor:
        EmptyProcessor
    + Details:
        The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).

WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))