'Weak Dependency Graph [60.0]'
------------------------------
Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
Input Problem:    innermost runtime-complexity with respect to
  Rules:
    {  double(0()) -> 0()
     , double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x)))
     , +(x, 0()) -> x
     , +(x, s(y)) -> s(+(x, y))
     , +(s(x), y) -> s(+(x, y))
     , double(x) -> +(x, x)}

Details:         
  We have computed the following set of weak (innermost) dependency pairs:
   {  double^#(0()) -> c_0()
    , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
    , +^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()
    , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
    , +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
    , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
  
  The usable rules are:
   {}
  
  The estimated dependency graph contains the following edges:
   {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
     ==> {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
   {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
     ==> {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
   {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
     ==> {double^#(0()) -> c_0()}
   {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
     ==> {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
   {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
     ==> {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
   {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
     ==> {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
   {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
     ==> {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
   {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
     ==> {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
   {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
     ==> {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
   {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
     ==> {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
   {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
     ==> {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
   {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
     ==> {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
  
  We consider the following path(s):
   1) {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
       , +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
       , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
      
      The usable rules for this path are empty.
      
        We have oriented the usable rules with the following strongly linear interpretation:
          Interpretation Functions:
           double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           0() = [0]
           s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_0() = [0]
           c_1(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           c_2() = [0]
           c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
        
        We have applied the subprocessor on the resulting DP-problem:
        
          'Weight Gap Principle'
          ----------------------
          Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
          Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
            Strict Rules:
              {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
               , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
            Weak Rules:
              {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
               , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
          
          Details:         
            'fastest of 'combine', 'Bounds with default enrichment', 'Bounds with default enrichment''
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
            Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
              Strict Rules:
                {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                 , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
              Weak Rules:
                {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                 , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            
            Details:         
              The problem was solved by processor 'combine':
              'combine'
              ---------
              Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
              Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                Strict Rules:
                  {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                   , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
                Weak Rules:
                  {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                   , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
              
              Details:         
                'sequentially if-then-else, sequentially'
                -----------------------------------------
                Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                  Strict Rules: {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
                  Weak Rules:
                    {  +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                     , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                     , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                
                Details:         
                  'if Check whether the TRS is strict trs contains single rule then fastest else fastest'
                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                  Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                    Strict Rules: {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
                    Weak Rules:
                      {  +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                       , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                  
                  Details:         
                    a) We first check the conditional [Success]:
                       We are considering a strict trs contains single rule TRS.
                    
                    b) We continue with the then-branch:
                       The problem was solved by processor 'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation'':
                       'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation''
                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                       Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                         Strict Rules: {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
                         Weak Rules:
                           {  +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                            , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                            , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                       
                       Details:         
                         The problem was solved by processor 'Matrix Interpretation':
                         'Matrix Interpretation'
                         -----------------------
                         Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                         Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                           Strict Rules: {+^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))}
                           Weak Rules:
                             {  +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                              , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                              , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                         
                         Details:         
                           Interpretation Functions:
                            double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            0() = [0]
                            s(x1) = [1] x1 + [5]
                            +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            double^#(x1) = [5] x1 + [0]
                            c_0() = [0]
                            c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [1]
                            +^#(x1, x2) = [4] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            c_2() = [0]
                            c_3(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            c_4(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            c_5(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                'sequentially if-then-else, sequentially'
                -----------------------------------------
                Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                  Strict Rules: {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
                  Weak Rules:
                    {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                     , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                     , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                
                Details:         
                  'if Check whether the TRS is strict trs contains single rule then fastest else fastest'
                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                  Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                    Strict Rules: {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
                    Weak Rules:
                      {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                       , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                  
                  Details:         
                    a) We first check the conditional [Success]:
                       We are considering a strict trs contains single rule TRS.
                    
                    b) We continue with the then-branch:
                       The problem was solved by processor 'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation'':
                       'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation''
                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                       Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                         Strict Rules: {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
                         Weak Rules:
                           {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                            , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                            , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                       
                       Details:         
                         The problem was solved by processor 'Matrix Interpretation':
                         'Matrix Interpretation'
                         -----------------------
                         Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                         Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                           Strict Rules: {+^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))}
                           Weak Rules:
                             {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                              , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                              , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                         
                         Details:         
                           Interpretation Functions:
                            double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            0() = [0]
                            s(x1) = [1] x1 + [3]
                            +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            double^#(x1) = [4] x1 + [3]
                            c_0() = [0]
                            c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [1] x2 + [1]
                            c_2() = [0]
                            c_3(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            c_4(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            c_5(x1) = [1] x1 + [2]
      
   2) {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
       , +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
       , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
       , +^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
      
      The usable rules for this path are empty.
      
        We have oriented the usable rules with the following strongly linear interpretation:
          Interpretation Functions:
           double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           0() = [0]
           s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_0() = [0]
           c_1(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           c_2() = [0]
           c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
        
        We have applied the subprocessor on the resulting DP-problem:
        
          'Weight Gap Principle'
          ----------------------
          Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
          Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
            Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
            Weak Rules:
              {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
               , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
               , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
               , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
          
          Details:         
            'fastest of 'combine', 'Bounds with default enrichment', 'Bounds with default enrichment''
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
            Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
              Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
              Weak Rules:
                {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                 , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                 , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                 , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            
            Details:         
              The problem was solved by processor 'combine':
              'combine'
              ---------
              Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
              Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                Weak Rules:
                  {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                   , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                   , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                   , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
              
              Details:         
                'sequentially if-then-else, sequentially'
                -----------------------------------------
                Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                  Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                  Weak Rules:
                    {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                     , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                     , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                     , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                
                Details:         
                  'if Check whether the TRS is strict trs contains single rule then fastest else fastest'
                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                  Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                    Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                    Weak Rules:
                      {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                       , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                       , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                  
                  Details:         
                    a) We first check the conditional [Success]:
                       We are considering a strict trs contains single rule TRS.
                    
                    b) We continue with the then-branch:
                       The problem was solved by processor 'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation'':
                       'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation''
                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                       Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                         Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                         Weak Rules:
                           {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                            , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                            , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                            , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                       
                       Details:         
                         The problem was solved by processor 'Matrix Interpretation':
                         'Matrix Interpretation'
                         -----------------------
                         Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                         Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                           Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                           Weak Rules:
                             {  +^#(s(x), y) -> c_4(+^#(x, y))
                              , +^#(x, s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y))
                              , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                              , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                         
                         Details:         
                           Interpretation Functions:
                            double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            0() = [0]
                            s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [1]
                            c_0() = [0]
                            c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [1]
                            c_2() = [0]
                            c_3(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            c_4(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            c_5(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
      
   3) {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
      
      The usable rules for this path are empty.
      
        We have applied the subprocessor on the union of usable rules and weak (innermost) dependency pairs.
        
          'Weight Gap Principle'
          ----------------------
          Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
          Input Problem:    innermost runtime-complexity with respect to
            Rules:
              {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
               , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
          
          Details:         
            'fastest of 'combine', 'Bounds with default enrichment', 'Bounds with default enrichment''
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
            Input Problem:    innermost runtime-complexity with respect to
              Rules:
                {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
                 , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
            
            Details:         
              The problem was solved by processor 'combine':
              'combine'
              ---------
              Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
              Input Problem:    innermost runtime-complexity with respect to
                Rules:
                  {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
                   , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
              
              Details:         
                'sequentially if-then-else, sequentially'
                -----------------------------------------
                Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                  Strict Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                  Weak Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                
                Details:         
                  'if Check whether the TRS is strict trs contains single rule then fastest else fastest'
                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                  Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                    Strict Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                    Weak Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                  
                  Details:         
                    a) We first check the conditional [Success]:
                       We are considering a strict trs contains single rule TRS.
                    
                    b) We continue with the then-branch:
                       The problem was solved by processor 'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation'':
                       'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation''
                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                       Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                         Strict Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                         Weak Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                       
                       Details:         
                         The problem was solved by processor 'Matrix Interpretation':
                         'Matrix Interpretation'
                         -----------------------
                         Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                         Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                           Strict Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                           Weak Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                         
                         Details:         
                           Interpretation Functions:
                            double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            0() = [0]
                            s(x1) = [1] x1 + [7]
                            +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            double^#(x1) = [4] x1 + [5]
                            c_0() = [0]
                            c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [4]
                            +^#(x1, x2) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [1]
                            c_2() = [0]
                            c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            c_5(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                'sequentially if-then-else, sequentially'
                -----------------------------------------
                Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                  Strict Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                  Weak Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                
                Details:         
                  'if Check whether the TRS is strict trs contains single rule then fastest else fastest'
                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                  Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                    Strict Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                    Weak Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                  
                  Details:         
                    a) We first check the conditional [Success]:
                       We are considering a strict trs contains single rule TRS.
                    
                    b) We continue with the then-branch:
                       The problem was solved by processor 'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation'':
                       'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation''
                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                       Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                         Strict Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                         Weak Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                       
                       Details:         
                         The problem was solved by processor 'Matrix Interpretation':
                         'Matrix Interpretation'
                         -----------------------
                         Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
                         Input Problem:    innermost relative runtime-complexity with respect to
                           Strict Rules: {double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))}
                           Weak Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                         
                         Details:         
                           Interpretation Functions:
                            double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            0() = [0]
                            s(x1) = [1] x1 + [3]
                            +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            double^#(x1) = [7] x1 + [4]
                            c_0() = [0]
                            c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [2]
                            +^#(x1, x2) = [4] x1 + [2] x2 + [2]
                            c_2() = [0]
                            c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            c_5(x1) = [1] x1 + [1]
      
   4) {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
       , double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
       , +^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
      
      The usable rules for this path are empty.
      
        We have oriented the usable rules with the following strongly linear interpretation:
          Interpretation Functions:
           double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           0() = [0]
           s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_0() = [0]
           c_1(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           c_2() = [0]
           c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
        
        We have applied the subprocessor on the resulting DP-problem:
        
          'Weight Gap Principle'
          ----------------------
          Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
          Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
            Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
            Weak Rules:
              {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
               , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
          
          Details:         
            'fastest of 'combine', 'Bounds with default enrichment', 'Bounds with default enrichment''
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
            Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
              Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
              Weak Rules:
                {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                 , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            
            Details:         
              The problem was solved by processor 'combine':
              'combine'
              ---------
              Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
              Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                Weak Rules:
                  {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                   , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
              
              Details:         
                'sequentially if-then-else, sequentially'
                -----------------------------------------
                Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                  Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                  Weak Rules:
                    {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                     , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                
                Details:         
                  'if Check whether the TRS is strict trs contains single rule then fastest else fastest'
                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                  Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                    Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                    Weak Rules:
                      {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                       , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                  
                  Details:         
                    a) We first check the conditional [Success]:
                       We are considering a strict trs contains single rule TRS.
                    
                    b) We continue with the then-branch:
                       The problem was solved by processor 'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation'':
                       'fastest of 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation', 'Matrix Interpretation''
                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                       Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                         Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                         Weak Rules:
                           {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                            , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                       
                       Details:         
                         The problem was solved by processor 'Matrix Interpretation':
                         'Matrix Interpretation'
                         -----------------------
                         Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
                         Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
                           Strict Rules: {+^#(x, 0()) -> c_2()}
                           Weak Rules:
                             {  double^#(x) -> c_5(+^#(x, x))
                              , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
                         
                         Details:         
                           Interpretation Functions:
                            double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            0() = [0]
                            s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                            double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [7]
                            c_0() = [0]
                            c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                            +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [1]
                            c_2() = [0]
                            c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                            c_5(x1) = [4] x1 + [1]
      
   5) {  double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))
       , double^#(0()) -> c_0()}
      
      The usable rules for this path are empty.
      
        We have oriented the usable rules with the following strongly linear interpretation:
          Interpretation Functions:
           double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           0() = [0]
           s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_0() = [0]
           c_1(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           c_2() = [0]
           c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
        
        We have applied the subprocessor on the resulting DP-problem:
        
          'Weight Gap Principle'
          ----------------------
          Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
          Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
            Strict Rules: {double^#(0()) -> c_0()}
            Weak Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
          
          Details:         
            We apply the weight gap principle, strictly orienting the rules
            {double^#(0()) -> c_0()}
            and weakly orienting the rules
            {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            using the following strongly linear interpretation:
              Processor 'Matrix Interpretation' oriented the following rules strictly:
              
              {double^#(0()) -> c_0()}
              
              Details:
                 Interpretation Functions:
                  double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                  0() = [0]
                  s(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                  +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                  double^#(x1) = [1] x1 + [1]
                  c_0() = [0]
                  c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [0]
                  +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                  c_2() = [0]
                  c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                  c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                  c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
              
            Finally we apply the subprocessor
            'Empty TRS'
            -----------
            Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
            Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
              Strict Rules: {}
              Weak Rules:
                {  double^#(0()) -> c_0()
                 , double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            
            Details:         
              The given problem does not contain any strict rules
      
   6) {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
      
      The usable rules for this path are empty.
      
        We have oriented the usable rules with the following strongly linear interpretation:
          Interpretation Functions:
           double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           0() = [0]
           s(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           double^#(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_0() = [0]
           c_1(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
           c_2() = [0]
           c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
           c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
        
        We have applied the subprocessor on the resulting DP-problem:
        
          'Weight Gap Principle'
          ----------------------
          Answer:           YES(?,O(n^1))
          Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
            Strict Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            Weak Rules: {}
          
          Details:         
            We apply the weight gap principle, strictly orienting the rules
            {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            and weakly orienting the rules
            {}
            using the following strongly linear interpretation:
              Processor 'Matrix Interpretation' oriented the following rules strictly:
              
              {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
              
              Details:
                 Interpretation Functions:
                  double(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                  0() = [0]
                  s(x1) = [1] x1 + [8]
                  +(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                  double^#(x1) = [1] x1 + [1]
                  c_0() = [0]
                  c_1(x1) = [1] x1 + [3]
                  +^#(x1, x2) = [0] x1 + [0] x2 + [0]
                  c_2() = [0]
                  c_3(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                  c_4(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
                  c_5(x1) = [0] x1 + [0]
              
            Finally we apply the subprocessor
            'Empty TRS'
            -----------
            Answer:           YES(?,O(1))
            Input Problem:    innermost DP runtime-complexity with respect to
              Strict Rules: {}
              Weak Rules: {double^#(s(x)) -> c_1(double^#(x))}
            
            Details:         
              The given problem does not contain any strict rules