*** 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).