The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).

0 CpxTRS
↳1 TrsToWeightedTrsProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms)
↳2 CpxWeightedTrs
↳3 TypeInferenceProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms)
↳4 CpxTypedWeightedTrs
↳5 CompletionProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms)
↳6 CpxTypedWeightedCompleteTrs
↳7 NarrowingProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms)
↳8 CpxTypedWeightedCompleteTrs
↳9 CpxTypedWeightedTrsToRntsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms)
↳10 CpxRNTS
↳11 InliningProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 48 ms)
↳12 CpxRNTS
↳13 SimplificationProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms)
↳14 CpxRNTS
↳15 CpxRntsAnalysisOrderProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms)
↳16 CpxRNTS
↳17 IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 173 ms)
↳18 CpxRNTS
↳19 IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 11 ms)
↳20 CpxRNTS
↳21 ResultPropagationProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms)
↳22 CpxRNTS
↳23 IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 209 ms)
↳24 CpxRNTS
↳25 IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 19 ms)
↳26 CpxRNTS
↳27 ResultPropagationProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms)
↳28 CpxRNTS
↳29 IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 46 ms)
↳30 CpxRNTS
↳31 IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID), 48 ms)
↳32 CpxRNTS
↳33 FinalProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳34 BOUNDS(1, n^1)

(0) Obligation:

The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

decrease(Cons(x, xs)) → decrease(xs)
decrease(Nil) → number42(Nil)
number42(x) → Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
goal(x) → decrease(x)

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(1) TrsToWeightedTrsProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Transformed TRS to weighted TRS

(2) Obligation:

The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxWeightedTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, n^1).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

decrease(Cons(x, xs)) → decrease(xs) [1]
decrease(Nil) → number42(Nil) [1]
number42(x) → Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
goal(x) → decrease(x) [1]

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(3) TypeInferenceProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Infered types.

(4) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

decrease(Cons(x, xs)) → decrease(xs) [1]
decrease(Nil) → number42(Nil) [1]
number42(x) → Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
goal(x) → decrease(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
decrease :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
Cons :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
Nil :: Cons:Nil
number42 :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
goal :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(5) CompletionProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)

The transformation into a RNTS is sound, since:

(a) The obligation is a constructor system where every type has a constant constructor,

(b) The following defined symbols do not have to be completely defined, as they can never occur inside other defined symbols:


decrease
number42
goal

(c) The following functions are completely defined:
none

Due to the following rules being added:
none

And the following fresh constants: none

(6) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS where critical functions are completely defined. The underlying TRS is:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

decrease(Cons(x, xs)) → decrease(xs) [1]
decrease(Nil) → number42(Nil) [1]
number42(x) → Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
goal(x) → decrease(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
decrease :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
Cons :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
Nil :: Cons:Nil
number42 :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
goal :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(7) NarrowingProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Narrowed the inner basic terms of all right-hand sides by a single narrowing step.

(8) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS where critical functions are completely defined. The underlying TRS is:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

decrease(Cons(x, xs)) → decrease(xs) [1]
decrease(Nil) → number42(Nil) [1]
number42(x) → Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
goal(x) → decrease(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
decrease :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
Cons :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
Nil :: Cons:Nil
number42 :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
goal :: Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(9) CpxTypedWeightedTrsToRntsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Transformed the TRS into an over-approximating RNTS by (improved) Size Abstraction.
The constant constructors are abstracted as follows:

Nil => 0

(10) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ number42(0) :|: z = 0
decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(x) :|: x >= 0, z = x
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x

(11) InliningProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Inlined the following terminating rules on right-hand sides where appropriate:

number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x

(12) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(x) :|: x >= 0, z = x
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x

(13) SimplificationProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Simplified the RNTS by moving equalities from the constraints into the right-hand sides.

(14) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

(15) CpxRntsAnalysisOrderProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Found the following analysis order by SCC decomposition:

{ number42 }
{ decrease }
{ goal }

(16) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {number42}, {decrease}, {goal}

(17) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)


Computed SIZE bound using CoFloCo for: number42
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 42

(18) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {number42}, {decrease}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: ?, size: O(1) [42]

(19) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)


Computed RUNTIME bound using CoFloCo for: number42
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 1

(20) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {decrease}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]

(21) ResultPropagationProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Applied inner abstraction using the recently inferred runtime/size bounds where possible.

(22) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {decrease}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]

(23) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)


Computed SIZE bound using CoFloCo for: decrease
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 42

(24) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {decrease}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
decrease: runtime: ?, size: O(1) [42]

(25) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)


Computed RUNTIME bound using CoFloCo for: decrease
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(n1) with polynomial bound: 2 + z

(26) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 1 }→ decrease(z) :|: z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
decrease: runtime: O(n1) [2 + z], size: O(1) [42]

(27) ResultPropagationProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Applied inner abstraction using the recently inferred runtime/size bounds where possible.

(28) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 3 + xs }→ s :|: s >= 0, s <= 42, z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 3 + z }→ s' :|: s' >= 0, s' <= 42, z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
decrease: runtime: O(n1) [2 + z], size: O(1) [42]

(29) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)


Computed SIZE bound using CoFloCo for: goal
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 42

(30) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 3 + xs }→ s :|: s >= 0, s <= 42, z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 3 + z }→ s' :|: s' >= 0, s' <= 42, z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
decrease: runtime: O(n1) [2 + z], size: O(1) [42]
goal: runtime: ?, size: O(1) [42]

(31) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID) transformation)


Computed RUNTIME bound using CoFloCo for: goal
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(n1) with polynomial bound: 3 + z

(32) Obligation:

Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

decrease(z) -{ 3 + xs }→ s :|: s >= 0, s <= 42, z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
decrease(z) -{ 2 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
goal(z) -{ 3 + z }→ s' :|: s' >= 0, s' <= 42, z >= 0
number42(z) -{ 1 }→ 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed:
Previous analysis results are:
number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
decrease: runtime: O(n1) [2 + z], size: O(1) [42]
goal: runtime: O(n1) [3 + z], size: O(1) [42]

(33) FinalProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Computed overall runtime complexity

(34) BOUNDS(1, n^1)