(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:

f(s(x)) → s(s(f(p(s(x)))))
f(0) → 0
p(s(x)) → x

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(1) CpxTrsMatchBoundsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

A linear upper bound on the runtime complexity of the TRS R could be shown with a Match Bound [MATCHBOUNDS1,MATCHBOUNDS2] of 2.
The certificate found is represented by the following graph.
Start state: 1
Accept states: [2]
Transitions:
1→2[f_1|0, p_1|0, 0|1, s_1|1]
1→3[s_1|1]
2→2[s_1|0, 0|0]
3→4[s_1|1]
4→5[f_1|1]
4→7[s_1|2]
4→2[0|2]
5→6[p_1|1]
5→2[s_1|1, 0|1]
6→2[s_1|1]
7→8[s_1|2]
8→9[f_1|2]
8→7[s_1|2]
8→2[0|2]
9→10[p_1|2]
9→2[s_1|1, 0|1]
10→2[s_1|2]

(2) BOUNDS(1, n^1)

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

Converted Cpx (relative) TRS to CDT

(4) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:

f(s(z0)) → s(s(f(p(s(z0)))))
f(0) → 0
p(s(z0)) → z0
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))), P(s(z0)))
F(0) → c1
P(s(z0)) → c2
S tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))), P(s(z0)))
F(0) → c1
P(s(z0)) → c2
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:

f, p

Defined Pair Symbols:

F, P

Compound Symbols:

c, c1, c2

(5) CdtLeafRemovalProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Removed 2 trailing nodes:

P(s(z0)) → c2
F(0) → c1

(6) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:

f(s(z0)) → s(s(f(p(s(z0)))))
f(0) → 0
p(s(z0)) → z0
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))), P(s(z0)))
S tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))), P(s(z0)))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:

f, p

Defined Pair Symbols:

F

Compound Symbols:

c

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

Removed 1 trailing tuple parts

(8) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:

f(s(z0)) → s(s(f(p(s(z0)))))
f(0) → 0
p(s(z0)) → z0
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))))
S tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:

f, p

Defined Pair Symbols:

F

Compound Symbols:

c

(9) CdtUsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The following rules are not usable and were removed:

f(s(z0)) → s(s(f(p(s(z0)))))
f(0) → 0

(10) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:

p(s(z0)) → z0
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))))
S tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0))))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:

p

Defined Pair Symbols:

F

Compound Symbols:

c

(11) CdtNarrowingProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Use narrowing to replace F(s(z0)) → c(F(p(s(z0)))) by

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))

(12) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:

p(s(z0)) → z0
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
S tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:

p

Defined Pair Symbols:

F

Compound Symbols:

c

(13) CdtUsableRulesProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The following rules are not usable and were removed:

p(s(z0)) → z0

(14) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:none
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
S tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:none

Defined Pair Symbols:

F

Compound Symbols:

c

(15) CdtRuleRemovalProof (UPPER BOUND(ADD(n^1)) transformation)

Found a reduction pair which oriented the following tuples strictly. Hence they can be removed from S.

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
We considered the (Usable) Rules:none
And the Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
The order we found is given by the following interpretation:
Polynomial interpretation :

POL(F(x1)) = x1   
POL(c(x1)) = x1   
POL(s(x1)) = [1] + x1   

(16) Obligation:

Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem
Rules:none
Tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
S tuples:none
K tuples:

F(s(z0)) → c(F(z0))
Defined Rule Symbols:none

Defined Pair Symbols:

F

Compound Symbols:

c

(17) SIsEmptyProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

The set S is empty

(18) BOUNDS(1, 1)