*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^1))]  ***
    Considered Problem:
      Strict DP Rules:
        
      Strict TRS Rules:
        append(Cons(x,xs),ys) -> Cons(x,append(xs,ys))
        append(Nil(),ys) -> ys
        goal(x,y) -> append(x,y)
      Weak DP Rules:
        
      Weak TRS Rules:
        
      Signature:
        {append/2,goal/2} / {Cons/2,Nil/0}
      Obligation:
        Innermost
        basic terms: {append,goal}/{Cons,Nil}
    Applied Processor:
      Bounds {initialAutomaton = minimal, enrichment = match}
    Proof:
      The problem is match-bounded by 1.
      The enriched problem is compatible with follwoing automaton.
        Cons_0(2,2) -> 1
        Cons_0(2,2) -> 2
        Cons_0(2,2) -> 3
        Cons_1(2,3) -> 1
        Cons_1(2,3) -> 3
        Nil_0() -> 1
        Nil_0() -> 2
        Nil_0() -> 3
        append_0(2,2) -> 1
        append_1(2,2) -> 1
        append_1(2,2) -> 3
        goal_0(2,2) -> 1
        2 -> 1
        2 -> 3
*** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))]  ***
    Considered Problem:
      Strict DP Rules:
        
      Strict TRS Rules:
        
      Weak DP Rules:
        
      Weak TRS Rules:
        append(Cons(x,xs),ys) -> Cons(x,append(xs,ys))
        append(Nil(),ys) -> ys
        goal(x,y) -> append(x,y)
      Signature:
        {append/2,goal/2} / {Cons/2,Nil/0}
      Obligation:
        Innermost
        basic terms: {append,goal}/{Cons,Nil}
    Applied Processor:
      EmptyProcessor
    Proof:
      The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).