*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: h(x,c(y,z),t(w)) -> h(c(s(y),x),z,t(c(t(w),w))) h(c(x,y),c(s(z),z),t(w)) -> h(z,c(y,x),t(t(c(x,c(y,t(w)))))) h(c(s(x),c(s(0()),y)),z,t(x)) -> h(y,c(s(0()),c(x,z)),t(t(c(x,s(x))))) t(x) -> x t(x) -> c(0(),c(0(),c(0(),c(0(),c(0(),x))))) t(t(x)) -> t(c(t(x),x)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {h/3,t/1} / {0/0,c/2,s/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {h,t}/{0,c,s} Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} Proof: We add the following weak dependency pairs: Strict DPs h#(x,c(y,z),t(w)) -> c_1(h#(c(s(y),x),z,t(c(t(w),w)))) h#(c(x,y),c(s(z),z),t(w)) -> c_2(h#(z,c(y,x),t(t(c(x,c(y,t(w))))))) h#(c(s(x),c(s(0()),y)),z,t(x)) -> c_3(h#(y,c(s(0()),c(x,z)),t(t(c(x,s(x)))))) t#(x) -> c_4(x) t#(x) -> c_5(x) t#(t(x)) -> c_6(t#(c(t(x),x))) Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. *** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: h#(x,c(y,z),t(w)) -> c_1(h#(c(s(y),x),z,t(c(t(w),w)))) h#(c(x,y),c(s(z),z),t(w)) -> c_2(h#(z,c(y,x),t(t(c(x,c(y,t(w))))))) h#(c(s(x),c(s(0()),y)),z,t(x)) -> c_3(h#(y,c(s(0()),c(x,z)),t(t(c(x,s(x)))))) t#(x) -> c_4(x) t#(x) -> c_5(x) t#(t(x)) -> c_6(t#(c(t(x),x))) Strict TRS Rules: h(x,c(y,z),t(w)) -> h(c(s(y),x),z,t(c(t(w),w))) h(c(x,y),c(s(z),z),t(w)) -> h(z,c(y,x),t(t(c(x,c(y,t(w)))))) h(c(s(x),c(s(0()),y)),z,t(x)) -> h(y,c(s(0()),c(x,z)),t(t(c(x,s(x))))) t(x) -> x t(x) -> c(0(),c(0(),c(0(),c(0(),c(0(),x))))) t(t(x)) -> t(c(t(x),x)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {h/3,t/1,h#/3,t#/1} / {0/0,c/2,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {h#,t#}/{0,c,s} Applied Processor: UsableRules Proof: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: t#(x) -> c_4(x) t#(x) -> c_5(x) *** 1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: t#(x) -> c_4(x) t#(x) -> c_5(x) Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {h/3,t/1,h#/3,t#/1} / {0/0,c/2,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {h#,t#}/{0,c,s} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 0, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following constant growth matrix-interpretation: 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(0) = [0] p(c) = [0] p(h) = [0] p(s) = [0] p(t) = [0] p(h#) = [0] p(t#) = [1] p(c_1) = [0] p(c_2) = [0] p(c_3) = [0] p(c_4) = [0] p(c_5) = [0] p(c_6) = [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: t#(x) = [1] > [0] = c_4(x) t#(x) = [1] > [0] = c_5(x) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: t#(x) -> c_4(x) t#(x) -> c_5(x) Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {h/3,t/1,h#/3,t#/1} / {0/0,c/2,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {h#,t#}/{0,c,s} Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor Proof: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).