*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) sel(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> X sel(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> sel(X,activate(Z)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate,from,sel}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT} Proof: We add the following weak dependency pairs: Strict DPs activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Weak DPs and mark the set of starting terms. *** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Strict TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) sel(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> X sel(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> sel(X,activate(Z)) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2,activate#/1,from#/1,sel#/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/2,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate#,from#,sel#}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: UsableRules Proof: We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) *** 1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Strict TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2,activate#/1,from#/1,sel#/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/2,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate#,from#,sel#}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 0, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(sel#) = {2}, uargs(c_2) = {1}, uargs(c_6) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [0] p(activate) = [1] x1 + [0] p(cons) = [1] x2 + [5] p(from) = [1] x1 + [0] p(n__from) = [1] x1 + [0] p(s) = [1] x1 + [0] p(sel) = [0] p(activate#) = [3] x1 + [0] p(from#) = [3] x1 + [0] p(sel#) = [1] x2 + [0] p(c_1) = [3] x1 + [0] p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [0] p(c_3) = [3] x1 + [0] p(c_4) = [3] x1 + [0] p(c_5) = [0] p(c_6) = [1] x1 + [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) = [1] Y + [5] > [0] = c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) = [1] Z + [5] > [1] Z + [0] = c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: activate#(X) = [3] X + [0] >= [3] X + [0] = c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) = [3] X + [0] >= [3] X + [0] = c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) = [3] X + [0] >= [3] X + [0] = c_3(X,X) from#(X) = [3] X + [0] >= [3] X + [0] = c_4(X) activate(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = X activate(n__from(X)) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = from(X) from(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [5] = cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = n__from(X) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) Strict TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) Weak DP Rules: sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Weak TRS Rules: Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2,activate#/1,from#/1,sel#/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/2,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate#,from#,sel#}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 0, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(sel#) = {2}, uargs(c_2) = {1}, uargs(c_6) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [0] p(activate) = [1] x1 + [2] p(cons) = [1] x2 + [7] p(from) = [0] p(n__from) = [1] p(s) = [1] x1 + [0] p(sel) = [4] p(activate#) = [1] x1 + [0] p(from#) = [0] p(sel#) = [2] x1 + [1] x2 + [8] p(c_1) = [0] p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [0] p(c_3) = [0] p(c_4) = [0] p(c_5) = [15] p(c_6) = [1] x1 + [2] Following rules are strictly oriented: activate#(n__from(X)) = [1] > [0] = c_2(from#(X)) activate(X) = [1] X + [2] > [1] X + [0] = X activate(n__from(X)) = [3] > [0] = from(X) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: activate#(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [0] = c_1(X) from#(X) = [0] >= [0] = c_3(X,X) from#(X) = [0] >= [0] = c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) = [1] Y + [15] >= [15] = c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) = [2] X + [1] Z + [15] >= [2] X + [1] Z + [12] = c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) from(X) = [0] >= [8] = cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) = [0] >= [1] = n__from(X) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: activate#(X) -> c_1(X) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) Strict TRS Rules: from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) Weak DP Rules: activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Weak TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2,activate#/1,from#/1,sel#/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/2,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate#,from#,sel#}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 0, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(sel#) = {2}, uargs(c_2) = {1}, uargs(c_6) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [0] p(activate) = [1] x1 + [0] p(cons) = [1] x2 + [0] p(from) = [1] x1 + [0] p(n__from) = [1] x1 + [0] p(s) = [1] x1 + [0] p(sel) = [0] p(activate#) = [1] p(from#) = [1] p(sel#) = [1] x2 + [0] p(c_1) = [0] p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [0] p(c_3) = [0] p(c_4) = [0] p(c_5) = [0] p(c_6) = [1] x1 + [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: activate#(X) = [1] > [0] = c_1(X) from#(X) = [1] > [0] = c_3(X,X) from#(X) = [1] > [0] = c_4(X) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: activate#(n__from(X)) = [1] >= [1] = c_2(from#(X)) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) = [1] Y + [0] >= [0] = c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) = [1] Z + [0] >= [1] Z + [0] = c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) activate(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = X activate(n__from(X)) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = from(X) from(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) = [1] X + [0] >= [1] X + [0] = n__from(X) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1.1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) Weak DP Rules: activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Weak TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2,activate#/1,from#/1,sel#/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/2,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate#,from#,sel#}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 0, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(sel#) = {2}, uargs(c_2) = {1}, uargs(c_6) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [0] p(activate) = [1] x1 + [4] p(cons) = [1] x2 + [0] p(from) = [4] p(n__from) = [2] p(s) = [1] x1 + [1] p(sel) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [1] p(activate#) = [8] p(from#) = [1] p(sel#) = [4] x1 + [1] x2 + [0] p(c_1) = [8] p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [7] p(c_3) = [1] p(c_4) = [1] p(c_5) = [0] p(c_6) = [1] x1 + [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: from(X) = [4] > [2] = cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) = [4] > [2] = n__from(X) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: activate#(X) = [8] >= [8] = c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) = [8] >= [8] = c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) = [1] >= [1] = c_3(X,X) from#(X) = [1] >= [1] = c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) = [1] Y + [0] >= [0] = c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) = [4] X + [1] Z + [4] >= [4] X + [1] Z + [4] = c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) activate(X) = [1] X + [4] >= [1] X + [0] = X activate(n__from(X)) = [6] >= [4] = from(X) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: activate#(X) -> c_1(X) activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_2(from#(X)) from#(X) -> c_3(X,X) from#(X) -> c_4(X) sel#(0(),cons(X,Y)) -> c_5(X) sel#(s(X),cons(Y,Z)) -> c_6(sel#(X,activate(Z))) Weak TRS Rules: activate(X) -> X activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X))) from(X) -> n__from(X) Signature: {activate/1,from/1,sel/2,activate#/1,from#/1,sel#/2} / {0/0,cons/2,n__from/1,s/1,c_1/1,c_2/1,c_3/2,c_4/1,c_5/1,c_6/1} Obligation: Full basic terms: {activate#,from#,sel#}/{0,cons,n__from,s} Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor Proof: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).