*** 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).