* Step 1: ToInnermost WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            f(.(.(x,y),z)) -> f(.(x,.(y,z)))
            f(.(nil(),y)) -> .(nil(),f(y))
            f(nil()) -> nil()
            g(.(x,.(y,z))) -> g(.(.(x,y),z))
            g(.(x,nil())) -> .(g(x),nil())
            g(nil()) -> nil()
        - Signature:
            {f/1,g/1} / {./2,nil/0}
        - Obligation:
             runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f,g} and constructors {.,nil}
    + Applied Processor:
        ToInnermost
    + Details:
        switch to innermost, as the system is overlay and right linear and does not contain weak rules
* Step 2: Bounds WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            f(.(.(x,y),z)) -> f(.(x,.(y,z)))
            f(.(nil(),y)) -> .(nil(),f(y))
            f(nil()) -> nil()
            g(.(x,.(y,z))) -> g(.(.(x,y),z))
            g(.(x,nil())) -> .(g(x),nil())
            g(nil()) -> nil()
        - Signature:
            {f/1,g/1} / {./2,nil/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f,g} and constructors {.,nil}
    + Applied Processor:
        Bounds {initialAutomaton = perSymbol, enrichment = match}
    + Details:
        The problem is match-bounded by 1.
        The enriched problem is compatible with follwoing automaton.
          ._0(1,1) -> 1
          ._0(1,4) -> 1
          ._0(4,1) -> 1
          ._0(4,4) -> 1
          ._1(1,1) -> 6
          ._1(1,4) -> 6
          ._1(1,5) -> 5
          ._1(1,6) -> 5
          ._1(4,1) -> 6
          ._1(4,4) -> 6
          ._1(4,5) -> 5
          ._1(4,6) -> 5
          ._1(6,1) -> 9
          ._1(6,4) -> 9
          ._1(7,8) -> 2
          ._1(9,1) -> 9
          ._1(9,4) -> 9
          ._1(10,8) -> 3
          ._1(10,8) -> 8
          ._1(10,10) -> 10
          f_0(1) -> 2
          f_0(4) -> 2
          f_1(1) -> 8
          f_1(4) -> 8
          f_1(5) -> 2
          f_1(5) -> 8
          f_1(6) -> 8
          g_0(1) -> 3
          g_0(4) -> 3
          g_1(1) -> 10
          g_1(4) -> 10
          g_1(6) -> 10
          g_1(9) -> 3
          g_1(9) -> 10
          nil_0() -> 4
          nil_1() -> 2
          nil_1() -> 3
          nil_1() -> 7
          nil_1() -> 8
          nil_1() -> 10
* Step 3: EmptyProcessor WORST_CASE(?,O(1))
    + Considered Problem:
        - Weak TRS:
            f(.(.(x,y),z)) -> f(.(x,.(y,z)))
            f(.(nil(),y)) -> .(nil(),f(y))
            f(nil()) -> nil()
            g(.(x,.(y,z))) -> g(.(.(x,y),z))
            g(.(x,nil())) -> .(g(x),nil())
            g(nil()) -> nil()
        - Signature:
            {f/1,g/1} / {./2,nil/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f,g} and constructors {.,nil}
    + Applied Processor:
        EmptyProcessor
    + Details:
        The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).

WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))