*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: f(s(x),y,y) -> f(y,x,s(x)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {f/3} / {s/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {f}/{s} Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} Proof: We add the following weak dependency pairs: Strict DPs f#(s(x),y,y) -> c_1(f#(y,x,s(x))) Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. *** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: f#(s(x),y,y) -> c_1(f#(y,x,s(x))) Strict TRS Rules: f(s(x),y,y) -> f(y,x,s(x)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {f/3,f#/3} / {s/1,c_1/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {f#}/{s} Applied Processor: UsableRules Proof: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: f#(s(x),y,y) -> c_1(f#(y,x,s(x))) *** 1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: f#(s(x),y,y) -> c_1(f#(y,x,s(x))) Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {f/3,f#/3} / {s/1,c_1/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {f#}/{s} Applied Processor: NaturalMI {miDimension = 1, miDegree = 0, miKind = Algebraic, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules, greedy = NoGreedy} Proof: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation (containing no more than 0 non-zero interpretation-entries in the diagonal of the component-wise maxima): The following argument positions are considered usable: none Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(f) = [0] p(s) = [0] p(f#) = [4] p(c_1) = [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: f#(s(x),y,y) = [4] > [0] = c_1(f#(y,x,s(x))) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: *** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: f#(s(x),y,y) -> c_1(f#(y,x,s(x))) Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {f/3,f#/3} / {s/1,c_1/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {f#}/{s} Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor Proof: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).